U.S. Shouldn't Send Troops

The staff is certainly justified in criticizing the United States' atrocious handling of the civil war in the former Yugoslavia.

While the Clinton administration openly sympathizes with the Bosnian Muslims, it has repeatedly shield away from taking prudent and honorable steps to support them against Serbian rebels. Rather than assuming its leadership role in NATO, the administration has justified its own cowardice by the intransigence of its European allies.

However, the staff exaggerates the United States' interest in the conflict when it suggests that the U.S. should be ready to commit ground forces to the conflict. The Bosnian conflict is essentially a civil war.

The justification for U.S. intervention lies in Serbia's military and economic support for the Bosnian Serb army, the Bosnian Serbs' blatant disregard for U.N. mediation and the genocidal warfare that the conquering Serbs have waged.

As such, the U.S. should immediately end the arms embargo against the Bosnian (and Croatian) forces--unilaterally if necessary--and step up NATO airstrikes to protect U.N.-designated safe havens. But the U.S. must not commit its own forces to this conflict. We should help the Bosnians in their civil war, but we cannot fight their war for them.

U.S. involvement might be a costly and prolonged affair, and the bottom line is that America's general interest in stability and human rights does not justify extensive American casualties.