[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 187 (Monday, November 27, 1995)]
[Senate]
[Pages S17517-S17518]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




  PEACE IN BOSNIA AND DEPLOYMENT OF UNITED STATES MILITARY FORCES TO 
                          IMPLEMENT THE PEACE

  Mr. THURMOND. Mr. President, on Tuesday, November 21, the Presidents 
of Bosnia, Croatia, and Serbia initialed a peace plan to end the 
fighting in Bosnia. The peace plan, if implemented and enforced by the 
parties would result in Bosnia being governed by two entities, the 
Moslem-Croat Federation, which would have jurisdiction over 51 percent 
of the territory, and the Serb Republic, which would have jurisdiction 
over 49 percent of the territory. Sarajevo will remain a united 
capital, which would fall within the territory of the Moslem-Croat 
Federation, along with its Serbian-held suburbs.
  On Wednesday, the U.N. Security Council voted to lift economic 
sanctions against Serbia and Montenegro, and also to lift the arms 
embargo against Bosnia and the other Yugoslavia Republics. The lifting 
of sanctions will only take place after the peace agreement is signed 
in Paris and Bosnian Serb military forces are redeployed behind a zone 
of separation.
  The Presidents of Bosnia, Croatia, and Serbia followed up the 
initialing of the peace plan in Dayton by forwarding identical letters 
to President Clinton vowing the support of their governments to the 
implementation and enforcement of the peace agreement and guaranteeing 
the security of NATO peacekeeping troops.
  However, not less than a week after Balkan leaders initialed this 
peace agreement, the Bosnian Serbs, led by Radovan Karadzic have 
demanded the renegotiation of the provisions regarding the future of 
Sarajevo. While in Sarajevo, Serbs residents are protesting the peace 
agreement that would place their neighborhoods under the control of the 
Moslem-Croat Federation. Along the Dalmation Coast, Croats are 
protesting the turnover of land in exchange for land along a Posavina 
corridor that would provide better security. Moslem-led Bosnian army 
soldiers entered a United Nations base in the Bihac enclave, manned by 
Bangladeshi peacekeepers and took equipment, including vehicles. There 
were also reports that Croat forces were burning and looting homes in 
northwestern Bosnia that is scheduled to be turned over to the Serb 
Republic.
  Mr. President, on November 8, the House and Senate leadership met 
with President Clinton to discuss the situation in Bosnia and the 
status of the negotiations in Dayton. At that time, I advised the 
President that I felt he had not convinced the American public, nor the 
Congress, that it was in the national interests of the United States to 
deploy United States military forces to implement or enforce the Bosnia 
peace agreement. I also advised the President that convincing the 
American public and Congress rested on his shoulders--the President 
needs to come before the American public and make his case.

  The President has not yet convinced the American public, nor the 
Congress, that the United States has an interest in securing, or 
ensuring, the implementation or enforcement of a peace agreement in 
Bosnia. He has not convinced the American public or Congress that 
European nations in the region where the fighting has taken place, and 
who would be directly affected if the fighting were to cross the 
borders of Yugoslavia, need the support of United States military 
forces.
  As a world leader, the United States should exercise its leadership 
by asking the European Community why it does not view it to be their 
responsibility to secure, or ensure a lasting peace in Bosnia; if 
necessary, why they do not employ the necessary military forces, as 
President Clinton has pledged to do, to implement the peace agreement.
  I respect the constitutional prerogatives of the President, as 
Commander in Chief, to exercise his authority to deploy U.S. military 
forces. However, the Congress has a constitutional responsibility to 
balance his check. As a Senator and the chairman of the Senate Armed 
Services Committee, I have a responsibility to ensure that a thorough 
and public national debate takes place.
  I support the North Atlantic Alliance and believe that the United 
States should remain engaged in, and show leadership in NATO. I believe 
that the 

[[Page S 17518]]
United States has obligations under the North Atlantic Treaty. I also 
believe that the American public and Congress are willing to use U.S. 
military forces to defend U.S. national security interests.
  In an effort to convince the American public and the Congress, 
President Clinton will address the Nation this evening to defend the 
United States-brokered Bosnia peace agreement and describe America's 
national or vital security interests which warrant the need to deploy 
United States military forces to Bosnia. In short, he needs to convince 
the public and Congress that it is the proper course of action for the 
United States to deploy troops to Bosnia.
  Mr. President, it is imperative that President Clinton make the case 
for United States involvement in Bosnia to the American public and gain 
their support before any United States military forces are deployed to 
Bosnia. The President must be clear about United States objectives in 
Bosnia and the risks involved. The decision to deploy U.S. military 
forces and the length of time spent in the operation should not be 
based on Presidential politics. The decision to send U.S. military 
forces has to be based on clear and achievable objectives and goals, 
and a developed exit strategy.

                          ____________________