FOR WHOM THE BELL TOLLS: THE SERBIAN DRESS-REHEARSAL FOR THE COMING CRISIS IN EUROPE

(Washington, D.C.): In recent days, the
naked aggression of totalitarian
forces in
Yugoslavia, the threatening stance of
their foreign allies — in this case
the Soviet Union — and the
reckless response of the West seem eerily
reminiscent of an
earlier crisis that set the stage for
European cataclysm. If the
United States and its allies wish to
reduce the chances that the Yugoslav
civil war will become a dress-rehearsal
for a larger calamity, much as the
Spanish civil war did in the late 1930s, bold
Western action must be undertaken at
once.

At this writing, some 30 percent of
the territory of the democratic republic
of Croatia has been seized by communist
Serbian insurgents backed by the federal
armed forces which are dominated by
Serbian officers and enlisted men.
Meanwhile, the dictator of Serbia,
Slobodan Milosevic, is ruthlessly
consolidating his control over the
southern province of Kosovo and the
central republic of Bosnia-Hercegovina,
having already successfully imposed his
will on the nominally autonomous northern
province of Vojvodina as well as the
republic of Montenegro. So confident is
Milosevic of his political and
territorial gains that he is in the
process of drafting a new Yugoslav
constitution — designed swiftly to
codify the “voluntary”
association of Serbian-dominated
entities, by means of what might be
termed an “All-Union
Treaty” for Yugoslavia.

As Milosevic has proceeded to realize
his dream of a “Greater
Serbia,” Western nations have been
discombobulated by Serbian claims that
this is merely an intractable
ethnic conflict, immune to useful outside
involvement. More importantly, they have
been paralyzed from introducing the
necessary peacekeeping forces to prevent
further bloodshed by Soviet warnings that
any meaningful intervention will result
in an “all-European” conflict.

As the West lurches from one stillborn
mediation effort to another, however,
more and more territory comes under
Serbian domination. Consequently, the
dangerous precedent is being set
that aggression pays, that the “New
World Order” will reward,
rather than repel, violence
used to settle regional conflicts.

This has obvious, portentous
implications for Europe in particular.
After all, the continent is on
the threshold of a series of instant
replays of the Yugoslav crisis
in the Soviet Union and perhaps elsewhere
in the Balkans. Moscow
center has already identified
specific areas within would-be breakaway
republics in which it will foster
the requisite “ethnic/historical
conflicts” needed to justify the
Kremlin’s campaign to retain
these assets — by force if necessary.

Unfortunately, Europe is transparently
incapable of dealing with such
contingencies. Notwithstanding countless
claims by European leaders that they could
be relied upon to establish effective
alternative security structures to NATO
(e.g., the Western European Union, the
Conference on Security and Cooperation in
Europe and the European Community), when
such structures were actually put to the
test in the Yugoslav crisis they
were found to be abysmally inadequate. Even
where nations like Germany and France
were disposed to take visionary actions
(such as immediate recognition of Croatia
and Slovenia — and even the introduction
of armed peacekeepers), the lowest-common
denominator character of these
organizations’ consensus decision-making
mechanisms made such actions utter
non-starters.

Tragically, the one nation
that might have played an instrumental
role in leading the
alliance in the required direction both
diplomatically and on the ground in
Yugoslavia — the United States
— chose to take a walk. Indeed,
in the midst of the crisis, President
Bush delivered a speech that reinforced his
Administration’s alignment with the repressive
forces of central control at the
direct expense of those making a
desperate bid for freedom. His shocking 1
August remarks to the Ukrainian Supreme
Soviet in Kiev could as easily have been
delivered in Zagreb.

The erosion of political will
evidenced in this crisis has even
infected generally sound observers like The
Economist which succumbed to the
temptation of viewing Croatian territory
as now somehow up for grabs. It
editorialized on 10 August 1991 that,
“The West would be unwise to offer
recognition to Croatia before it is clear
what territory the Croatian government in
Zagreb really controls.” Followed to
its logical conclusion, this approach
would encourage Serbia to keep its armor
rolling as it continues to veto or
otherwise stymie outside mediation
efforts.

The Center for Security Policy
believes that the time for
Western equivocation and inaction in
Yugoslavia is over. There are no
longer legitimate or even convenient
arguments — for example, springing from
ethnic or historical factors — that can
justify ignoring the brutal reality that
the United States and its allies are
becoming, in effect, accomplices to a
blatant communist land-grab and political
conquest.

More than freedom will die in
Yugoslavia with the systematic
extinguishing of Croatian
sovereignty and independence. Europe
itself will, in time, reap the whirlwind
of having abandoned democratic principles
and values and the courage to stand by
those who aspire to them. The nauseating
scenes of Italy, a birthplace of
democracy, being transformed almost
overnight into a warden for the Albanian
gulag will likely be repeated throughout
Western Europe — on a far more massive
scale — if the West abandons the
Croatians, Slovenians and other
freedom-bound peoples.

It is far more likely that
establishing conditions of free political
expression, respect for human rights and
economic opportunity will foster the sort
of national consensus that encourages
citizens to seek to cure, rather than
flee, the ravages of decades of communist
misrule. On the other hand, the West’s
present, essentially hands-off approach
— to say nothing of its
episodic support for the repressive
central authorities — will
exacerbate the very conditions that force
desperate souls to seek safe haven, no
matter what the cost.

If Western policy is to help avoid
catastrophe in Yugoslavia and the
debilitating repercussions for Europe,
the Center believes that the United
States must no longer defer to European
“management” of the Yugoslav
crisis. It must now begin to exercise
leadership by:

• Formal recognition of the
  sovereignty and independence of
  Croatia and Slovenia;
• The immediate convening of the UN
  Security Council on the Yugoslav
  crisis leading to a vote
  authorizing the dispatch of armed
  peacekeepers to Croatia and, as
  needed, elsewhere in Yugoslavia.
  If the Soviets are determined to
  veto such a move, they should be
  compelled to do so on the record;
• The simultaneous convening of a
  meeting of NATO foreign and
  defense ministers in Brussels for
  the purpose of defining a
  concrete action plan designed to
  end the fighting in Yugoslavia;
• Publicly rejecting the Soviet
  threat of an
  “all-European” conflict
  in the event the UN, NATO or some
  other organization intervenes to
  stop the bloodshed in Yugoslavia
  and put them on notice that any
  and all Western assistance flows
  to Moscow will be brought to a
  abrupt halt should the USSR aid
  and abet Serbian aggression;
• Documenting Serbia’s outrageous
  treatment of the Albanian
  majority in Kosovo and of other
  non-Serbian minorities elsewhere
  for the purpose of putting into
  proper perspective the
  Croatian-Serbian conflict; and
• Ensuring that the international
  arms embargo is made effective by
  stanching Serbia’s unrestrained
  access to sophisticated weaponry
  — largely from the Yugoslav
  National Army — just as those
  resisting Serbian aggression are
  denied legal access to even the
  most rudimentary self-defense
  capabilities.