Thanks, But No Thanks: Clinton Should Back Bosnia in Rejecting Vance-Owen ‘Peace In Our Time’

(Washington, D.C.): President Clinton’s baptism of fire in foreign affairs looms before him. The long-suffering people of Bosnia, those elsewhere yearning for freedom and security — and the ruthless authoritarians who are their enemies — are watching expectantly to see how the new President handles his first major test: the appeal from U.N. special envoy Cyrus Vance and E.C. mediator David Owen for a U.S. endorsement of their so-called Bosnian "peace plan."

The Vance-Owen plan would divide Bosnia into ten federated provinces three of which would be designated as Serb, three Croat, three Moslem and one mixed — subject to a "loose" central government. While it would be required to withdraw from some portions of the territory it has seized and "ethnically cleansed," Serbia would maintain control over others. A total of roughly 43 percent of Bosnia would be in Serb hands.

The question is: Will Mr. Clinton will prove a more reliable friend to those aspiring for democracy and economic opportunity than was his predecessor? Or will he be roughly as accommodating to tyrants as the Bush-Baker regime? An early indication will be found in his response to the Vance-Owen peace plan.

The Vance-Owen Plan’s Fatal Flaws

Just as the Versailles Treaty produced not a lasting peace but an interlude between and pretext to war, so the Vance-Owen "peace plan" will assure the future outbreak of regional hostilities — even if succeeds (against all odds) in temporarily suspending the present ones. This is so for the following reasons:

  • The Vance-Owen plan unmistakably rewards Serbia’s aggression and legitimatizes its systematic practice of genocide in territories seized by force.
  •  

  • The plan — like the negotiations of which it was a product — is effectively an act of moral equivalency: It equates those responsible for Serbia’s crimes against humanity with the victims of those crimes. It would also seem to make moot the essential prosecution of those who perpetrated such crimes.
  •  

  • To an extent that would rival the most gerrymandered of U.S. congressional districts, the Vance-Owen plan carves up Bosnia in a completely unworkable fashion. Non-contiguous enclaves — drawn as much by war and ethnic cleansing as by traditional demographics — will simply invite future conflict, not diminish its likelihood.
  •  

  • What is more, America’s endorsement of the Vance-Owen plan would depart from long-standing U.S. policy to oppose the changing of borders by the use of force — the practical effect of its parcelling out ethnic fiefdoms.
  •  

  • U.S. acquiescence in the Vance-Owen plan will be seen, properly, by the Muslim world as further evidence of Western indifference to the barbarous treatment of coreligionists at the hands of those who call themselves Christians.
  •  

  • It is, at best, irresponsibly naive and, at worst, utterly reckless to pretend that — absent appropriate punishment being meted out to Serbia for its aggression — the parties will conform to the Vance-Owen plan’s requirements for peaceful coexistence and co-governance of the federation.
  •  

  • In fact, as leaders of the Bosnian Serbs have made clear, the "peace plan" will not prevent those loyal to Slobodan Milosevic from pursuing his goal of a "Greater Serbia." It will simply serve to enable further consolidation of their control of the Bosnian elements of that empire and render problematic any future Western efforts to impede Belgrade’s formal annexation of said territory.
  •  

  • U.S. endorsement of the Vance-Owen plan would also be tantamount to ceding victory to the hardline forces in Russia who have been boasting of their ability effectively to veto any international actions contrary to Serbian interests. To be sure, such a victory will only embolden the Old Guard in Moscow — in all likelihood, encouraging them, among other things, to pursue their own programs of ethnic cleansing.

 

President Clinton: Do Not Become a Party to Appeasement

The United States — and, under its leadership, the international community — declined to consider proposals by Saddam Hussein that might have led to the partitioning of Iraqi-occupied Kuwait. At the time, a simple and common-sense principle applied: Aggressors must not be rewarded for their aggression. The same principle must apply today.

The Center for Security Policy believes that President Clinton must make good on his campaign pledge that aggression in Bosnia "will not stand." In this regard, the Center urges that he reject the Vance-Owen plan in favor of the following specific steps:

  • An immediate lifting of the international arms embargo as it applies to Bosnia-Hercegovina in order to afford Bosnian citizens the ability to defend themselves;
  •  

  • Effective enforcement of the U.N. "no-fly" zone;
  •  

  • Serving notice that selected air strikes will be conducted against targets in Serbia if logistical support and other assistance to irregular forces in Bosnia are not terminated at once;
  •  

  • Intensification of Western relief efforts;
  •  

  • Offering temporary asylum in the United States to refugees of the Bosnian-Serbian conflict who have been victimized through incarceration in Serbian prison camps, rape centers and other detention centers and their families; and
  •  

  • Blocking any efforts to provide amnesty to Serbian war criminals.

 

The Bottom Line

President Clinton is to be commended for resisting pressure from the United Nations, European Community and others like House Foreign Affairs Committee Chairman Rep. Lee Hamilton (D-IN) who want him to endorse the "peace plan" immediately. In saying — as White House Press spokesperson Dee Dee Myers did today — that the President would "be supportive of [the Vance-Owen plan] if the different factions agree to support it," however, he risks encouraging the sort of coercion of the Bosnian Muslims that Messers. Vance and Owen have systematically engaged in over the past few months.

Despite Vance-Owen’s extortion, the elected Bosnian government has rejected their plan — for good reason. The United States and every other civilized nation should now follow suit.

Center for Security Policy

Please Share:

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *