[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 128 (Thursday, August 3, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Page S11338]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                            FIRE, READY, AIM

  Mr. SIMON. Mr. President, the Bosnian policy of the United States is 
lacking in backbone and commitment.
  I confess, it discourages me.
  I am not the only one who is discouraged.
  A column by Tom Friedman appeared in the Sunday July 30, 1995, New 
York Times that is, unfortunately, on target. And I ask that it be 
printed in the Record.
  The article follows:
                [From the New York Times, July 30, 1995]

                            Fire, Ready, Aim

                        (By Thomas L. Friedman)

       Washington: Lost in the commotion about the Senate vote to 
     lift the arms embargo on Bosnia, and President Clinton's 
     threat to veto such a move, is a small fact of some 
     importance: Both the President's policy and the Congress's 
     policy duck the real issue in Bosnia and are formulas for 
     continued war.
       What are our real interests in Bosnia? They are four: halt 
     the killing, prevent the conflict from spreading, prevent the 
     conflict from turning into a Christian-Muslim holy war and 
     insure that it does not end in a way that permanently damages 
     America's ties with its European allies, NATO and Russia.
       The only way to realize those objectives is for the U.S. 
     and its allies to draw up a map that divides Bosnia roughly 
     along the lines of the NATO-Russia Contact Group proposal--50 
     percent Serb, 50 percent Muslim-Croat--and then use all 
     necessary force, including bombing Belgrade it necessary, to 
     impose those cease-fire lines on all the parties.
       But, you might say, that would drag the U.S. into the war. 
     Hey, we're already in the war. The U.S. and NATO last week 
     committed to using their air power to defend a Muslim safe 
     haven from further murderous Serbian attacks. Well, if we are 
     ready to use what Defense Secretary William Perry called 
     ``massive'' air bombardments to defend an isolated Muslim 
     safe haven, why not use them to defend a cease-fire and a 
     settlement map that could stop the killing altogether? Why 
     not use them to defend a peace plan that would establish a 
     Bosnian Muslim state centered around Sarajevo, next to a 
     Bosnian Serb entity that would be federated with Serbia and a 
     Bosnia Croat entity that would be federated with Croatia?
       Moreover, since we want the British, French and U.N. to 
     keep their peacekeeping troops in Bosnia, and they are 
     willing, why not have them use their power to oversee a 
     partition plan and cease-fire lines, instead of to just 
     oversee further carnage?
       Usually countries decide their war aims first and commit 
     their military power second. The Clinton Administration has 
     done just the reverse. It has decided to get involved 
     militarily in Bosnia, but with no clearly defined plan for 
     achieving America's basic interests. If we are going to enter 
     this war, it should only be to end this war--and the only way 
     to do that is through some form of partition.
       Of course it would be preferable to have a pluralistic, 
     multi-ethnic Bosnian society and state, where everyone lives 
     together. But the parties had that once. It was called 
     Yugoslavia, and the Serbs, Muslims and Croats all helped to 
     rip that state apart. That is why the only way to stabilize 
     things now is to divide Bosnia among them.
       But instead, the Administration and Congress are posturing. 
     The Administration doesn't want to lift the arms embargo, but 
     it also doesn't want to impose any settlement, because it 
     fears that would involve America too deeply and because it 
     knows it would mean accepting the very partition plans it 
     advised the Muslims for years to reject. The Clinton 
     Administration wants more of the status quo because its only 
     clear goal is to get through November 1996 without U.S. 
     troops in Bosnia.
       The Congress, by contrast, just wants to get through the 
     evening news. It wants to feel good about lifting the 
     embargo, but does not want to recognize that this will only 
     trigger a heavier Serbian onslaught against the Muslims, 
     which they will only be able to resist in the short term with 
     the help of direct Western military intervention, which is 
     precisely the sort of deep involvement Congress is actually 
     trying to avoid.
       With the Administration plan the Muslims lose slowly. With 
     the Congress plan the Muslims lose quickly.
       Neither the Administration nor the Congress wants to 
     recognize what the Europeans already have--that the ideal 
     multi-ethnic, democratic Bosnia, if it were ever possible, 
     cannot be achieved now. The only way to achieve it would be 
     to force the Serbs, Muslims and Croats to live together under 
     one roof, which they demonstrably do not want to do. None of 
     the parties right now are fighting to live together. They are 
     each fighting for ethnic survival or independence.
       We can lament the idea of a multiethnic, pluralistic Bosnia 
     but we cannot build it from the raw material at hand. The 
     only sane thing left is to stop the killing and build the 
     least bad peace around the Bosnia we have, which is one in 
     which Serbs, Croats and Muslims live apart until they can 
     learn again to live together.
     

                          ____________________