|
Balkan Strategic Studies |
November 1997
Turning Point In
Brcko
By Yossef Bodansky, Senior Editor of Defense & Foreign Affairs
publications, Director of Research at the International Strategic Studies
Association (Washington DC), Director of the US House of Representatives Task
Force on Terrorism and Low-Intensity Conflict, and author of several books,
including two on the crisis in the former Yugoslavia.
The long-term impact of the Clinton-Islamist coalition in Bosnia-Herzegovina is now showing. The US has ensured that the Bosnian Muslim army is ready to begin attacking and eliminating the remaining Serb areas of Bosnia-Herzegovina to create a unified Islamic state, perhaps as soon as next Spring.
THE US CLINTON Administration is
now on record as saying that it intends to keep US forces in Bosnia-Herzegovina
"indefinitely" in order to secure the survival of an Islamic state
controlling the entire territory. With that confirmation, the long-standing
policy of the Clinton Administration -- securing Izetbegovic's Islamic State at
all cost, including direct US military intervention -- is being spelled out
publicly.
In mid-September 1997, US senior officials suggested in Sarajevo that the US
forces would remain in Bosnia beyond their scheduled pullout in June 1998.
Instead, the diplomats argued that it was imperative for US forces to stay in
Bosnia-Herzegovina in order to ensure the implementation of the Dayton-Paris
Accords.
"To leave without firm institutions in place would be a debacle," said
Jacques Klein, the US deputy high representative for Bosnia. "That would be
a disaster for the West." Ambassador Robert Frowick is convinced US forces
should remain committed to Bosnia for an "indefinite period of time to pull
together the civilian and military dimensions" of their current mission.
Thus, into the fifth year of relentless implementation, the initial long-term
consequences of the Clinton Administration's Bosnia policy are already apparent.
The US "direct" and "indirect" involvement in the former
Yugoslavia since early 1993 -- irrespective of whether these activities have
been within or outside "the letter of the law" -- has already had a
profound impact on the developments in the former Yugoslavia, and, consequently,
on the global strategic posture of the United States. Significantly, all the
direct and indirect strategic by-products of the Bosnia policy of the Clinton
Administration have proven adverse to the vital interests of the US itself and
its closest allies.
The essence of the Clinton Administration Bosnia policy has been to tolerate,
even encourage, Islamist support for the Izetbegovic Administration,
particularly its assertive and escalatory military strategy. Washington
considers the Islamists the only bloc capable of sustaining support for
the besieged Administration in Sarajevo even though the vehemently anti-US
objectives of militant Islam, led by Iran, could not have been misunderstood or
missed.
There should not have been any doubt about the essence of the Izetbegovic
Administration either. Since 1990, Izetbegovic and the top leadership of
Bosnia-Herzegovina have repeatedly demonstrated their commitment to the Islamist
line and their very close relations with Tehran and other Islamists, as well as
determination to work jointly to further the march of militant radical Islam in
the Balkans and into Western Europe. Moreover, since the Spring of 1991, in the
aftermath of the Gulf Crisis, the Islamist leadership has been stressing that
the assault on Western Europe, and subsequently the US, is the urgent priority
of militant radical Islam.
The Iran-led Islamist camp began supplying weapons to the Muslim forces in
Bosnia-Herzegovina even before the formal independence of the country. By 1992,
the Sarajevo leadership was so confident in its survival that it formulated an
offensive oriented long-term plan that is still being implemented. Two major
aspects in this plan are: (1) to instigate a major clash between the US-led West
and the Serbs and Croats through the use of terrorism (including self-inflicted)
and provocations, and (2) to build the largest armed forces in the region
capable of maintaining offensive pressure and, following the West's victory over
Sarajevo's enemies, to maintain regional hegemony.
When the Clinton Administration took office in early 1993, the Bosnian Muslim
forces were already preparing for an escalatory surge. For the Clinton
Administration, staunch support for the Bosnian Muslims was a combination of a
moralistic imperative (assisting victims of atrocities) and, given the
importance of Bosnia to the Muslim world, an instrument of getting the Muslim
world to tolerate the US's invigorated effort to contain both Iran and Iraq.
However, it did not take long for this policy to fall apart. Since assuming
power, the Clinton Administration has used a range of political machinations to
bring about the collapse of every diplomatic initiative to reach a ceasefire and
negotiated solution. It has also facilitated a massive flow of arms and experts
into Bosnia Herzegovina.
The marked improvement in the military capabilities of the Bosnian Muslim forces
as a result of the initial flow of weapons and experts from the Muslim world
brought Sarajevo to attempt to consolidate better control over the weapons'
supply lines: attacking the Croats in central Bosnia-Herzegovina. Consequently,
the Croats cut all delivery routes through Croatian territory. According to
French officers, the US resorted to direct supply by air to the Muslim forces in
Bihac. Meanwhile, the US put tremendous pressure on Zagreb to reach an agreement
with Sarajevo: the Croat-Bosnian "federation". In return, Washington
would assist the Croats to destroy the Serb enclaves on Croatian territory.
In early 1994, with the supply lines secured, the Bosnian Muslim forces embarked
on a major build-up and escalation. Direct US involvement and better UN
protection were achieved as a result of the "Serb mortar shell" in
Sarajevo: self-inflicted terrorism by the Bosnian Muslim Government. Meanwhile,
a massive weapons and experts supply system was being established, dominated by
Iran. A very apprehensive Zagreb wondered if the West should not reconsider the
ramification of this Islamist build-up. Washington had "no
instructions" concerning the matter and the Islamist build-up immediately
went underway. There was no way back. The specific incident of late April 1994
was thus but one episode in a persistent and much wider Bosnia policy formulated
and pursued by a small group of very senior US officials personally led by the
President.
However, despite the massive build-up, the Bosnian Muslim forces failed to
defeat the Bosnian Serbs or instigate a major Western military intervention.
Therefore, Sarajevo convinced Washington in the Winter of 1994-95 to further
escalate its direct involvement in the war. Consequently, in February 1995, the
US arranged and was responsible for an airlift into Tuzla in order to facilitate
a strategic offensive. It failed. There followed a series of provocations
(including yet another self-inflicted "Serb mortar shell" in Sarajevo)
to get the US-led NATO to launch a massive bombing campaign against the Serbs,
facilitate the Muslim-Croat offensive, and ultimately impose the Dayton-Paris
Accords.
Although the Clinton Administration insists that the Dayton-Paris Accords aim to
consolidate a multi-ethnic democratic state, there has been no effort on the
part of the US or its NATO allies to implement this aspect. On the contrary, the
Islamists are well entrenched as the dominant force in Sarajevo and the Bosnian
Muslim armed forces. Iran has the strongest influence in Sarajevo. Thus, the
Clinton Administration in effect facilitated the most important Islamist
strategic surge -- establishing a foothold and a springboard into Europe -- in
the outcome of a policy aimed to "containing" the spread of Islamism
in the Middle East.
Furthermore, the mere process of getting the weapons and mujahedin into
Bosnia-Herzegovina has global reverberations and disastrous ramifications for
the US. In its eagerness to arrange for large quantities of weapons and experts
for Bosnia-Herzegovina, the Clinton Administration looked the other way as
resources were being diverted by participants in the conspiracy to their own
pet-causes: Islamist subversion from Kashmir to Chechnya, Islamist terrorism
from Western Europe to Egypt. Even Arab security officials now acknowledge that
the rising groups of the "Balkans" [Islamist volunteers who fought in
the Balkans] are worse than those of the "Afghans" [Islamist
volunteers who fought in Afghanistan during the 1980s]. The on-going struggle of
the Muslim state in Bosnia under pressure from both Croats and Serbs only
increases the despair and militancy of the "Balkans", sending them to
seek revenge against those powers they blame for the failure of the Islamist
Sarajevo. The US tops their list.
MEANWHILE, THE regional ramifications of the imposition of the Dayton-Paris
Accords since late 1995 have been adverse. The validity, viability and
legitimacy of the Dayton-Paris Accords as the cornerstone of a peaceful
resolution of the wars in Bosnia-Herzegovina is far from certain. Similarly, the
ability of an increasingly US-dominated I-FOR (Implementation Force) and later
S-FOR (Stabilising Force), even if it is impartial, to enforce a peace process
should be assessed on the basis of the situation in Bosnia-Herzegovina and the
willingness of the local key players to accept the peace process. A closer
examination of the dynamics in the former Yugoslavia since the Fall of 1995 cast
grave doubt on the logic behind, and viability of, the Dayton-Paris process.
While attention is being focused on the situation in Bosnia-Herzegovina, the key
regional powers -- Yugoslavia and Croatia -- are fully aware that the solution
envisioned by the Accords cannot be stabilised and that a regional eruption is
therefore highly likely. Consequently, there is an escalation of an arms race
between Croatia and rump Yugoslavia in preparation for the regional war to
determine the fate of the post-crisis Balkans. The only thing Zagreb and
Belgrade seem to agree on is the inevitably of the partition of
Bosnia-Herzegovina, that is, the elimination of a Muslim political entity. The
differences in the military build-up in the new Yugoslavia and Croatia are a
reflection of the emerging national priorities of these two key players in the
Balkans. Both are united in their commitment to co-existence in a new Balkans,
having carved up Bosnia-Herzegovina between them.
These dramatic developments did not happen suddenly or in a vacuum. Rather, they
are the outcome of a major disruption -- the US imposition of the Dayton-Paris
Accords -- to already escalating inner tensions and dynamics in the former
Yugoslavia. This process, already dangerous and destabilising in its own right,
has been evolving since the early 1990s in and around Bosnia-Herzegovina. In the
aftermath of the Dayton-Paris Accords there is a profound difference in the key
players' perception of the immediate future. President Franjo Tudjman's Zagreb
believes there is no escape from a major war before a new realignment of forces
in the territory of the former Yugoslavia can be established. President Slobodan
Milosevic's Belgrade still hopes to be able to negotiate and bargain its way to
Western recognition of the emergence of a new Serb-dominated Yugoslavia and a
new Croatia dominating the territory of the former Yugoslavia, including the
partition of Bosnia-Herzegovina between them. The new Yugoslavia is exhausted
from the sanctions and the collapse of Serb spirit. Croatia, in a sharp
contrast, is rejuvenated by the success of the offensive in the Krajina and
Bosnia-Herzegovina, particularly the Western tolerance of the ensuing
"ethnic cleansing" of Serbs. Tudjman is in a fighting spirit,
convinced that Zagreb will be able to realise its regional aspirations only
through the force of arms.
Sarajevo is not oblivious to this process. Fully aware of the extent of the
threat to its very existence, the Izetbegovic Administration is adamant on
instigating crises in order to have US/NATO forces destroy the Serbs and Croats
for them so that there is no threat to Sarajevo. Sarajevo has a bigger objective
in mind: to evolve regional dynamics, and especially establish outright US
commitment to Sarajevo, which will deter Germany and Russia from endorsing and
facilitating the elimination of the Muslim entity for their respective proteges.
Alija Izetbegovic and his closest aides, particularly Delic, are convinced that
the Clinton Administration can be manipulated into playing this role even in the
face of clear preparations for, and active support of, anti-European Islamist
terrorism from territory controlled by Sarajevo.
These Islamist activities, including the manipulation of the Clinton
Administration, are the primary destabilising factors threatening the chances
for a lingering peace in the former Yugoslavia. Sarajevo is determined to
deliver the spark that can ignite the region and thus become the catalyst for an
uncontrollable escalation of any eruption into the rest of Europe.
The vast improvement, and ensuing assertiveness, of the Bosnian Muslim armed
forces is a direct outcome of the US and Arab/Muslim military assistance
programs. By mid-1996, senior officers and high-level politicians were no longer
concealing their determination to go to war and complete the occupation of Serb
and Croat held territory the moment their forces were ready and equipped. In
mid-April 1997, Bosnian Army commander, General Rasim Delic, issued a stern
warning that the Bosnian Muslims would fight any move to carve up
Bosnia-Herzegovina as part of a permanent solution. "The creation of the
Bosnian Army is the biggest historical fact that marked the beginning of a new
political era in Bosnia," Delic said. The Bosnian Muslim Army is "a
true force and all enemies of Bosnia who want partition of the country or who
would dare to risk the adventure of a new war must take that fact into
account".
Sarajevo's belligerency enjoys the support and endorsement of the Clinton
Administration, if not in words than in deeds as demonstrated by the continued
supply of weapons and military expertise to the Bosnian Muslims. Moreover,
starting the Summer of 1997, the US -- under the banner of S-FOR -- has launched
a concentrated effort to fracture and demoralise the Bosnian Serbs to the point
of self-destruction, or, at the least, inability to withstand a Bosnian Muslim
surge. This effort has been justified as the pursuit of war criminals and the
implementation of political reforms among the Bosnian Serbs. Taken together, the
US involvement in inner-Serb politics in Bosnia-Herzegovina -- from the hunt for
war criminals to the return of Muslim refugees to Brcko -- is aimed to fracture
the Bosnian Serbs, divide them into two rival pockets, and instigate a clash
involving massive use of S-FOR power that will ultimately permit the Bosnian
Muslims to complete the "liberation" of "their" country as
advocated by Izetbegovic and Delic.
The Bosnian Serb leadership is painfully aware of this dynamic but has so far
proven incapable of withstanding the US-led pressure and enticements. Momcilo
Krajisnik, President in the Bosnia-Herzegovina Presidency from the Bosnian Serb
Republic, warned that the goal of the current political dynamics is to divide
the Serb Republic in two parts -- western and eastern -- that would not exist
without each other. "What the Serbs in the [Bosnian] Serb Republic gained
from this war is that they have become aware of their national status and unity;
that is why some are trying to break us up," Krajisnik said. Although the
Bosnian Serbs will neither rise up against Bosnia-Herzegovina as defined by the
Dayton-Paris Accords, nor will they let anyone take away their independence.
"WE WANT to implement the Dayton Agreement and at the same time preserve
the Serb Republic with a high level of independence and state attributes the
republic gained through the peace agreement," Krajisnik said. He implied
that the US-led S-FOR was actively attempting to reverse these gains. "A
terrible propaganda campaign is being waged. Its aim is to turn the Serbs
against each other and weaken the Serb Republic from within. We must not allow
this because the only losers in intra-Serb clashes will be the Serbs
themselves." Krajisnik reminded that the self-weakening of the Republic of
Serb Krajina enabled the Croats to destroy it and evict all the Serbs (in a
campaign endorsed and supported by the US).
The already apparent fracturing of, and internal feuds among, the Bosnian Serbs
are but instruments for the expediting of two possible scenarios aimed to
establish Izetbegovic's rule over the entire Bosnia-Herzegovina.
According to the first scenario, some Bosnian Serbs, will use arms against the
US forces with S-FOR, leading to a massive US retaliation including the use of
air power. Subsequently -- as in 1995 -- the Bosnian Muslim armed forces will
then exploit the rout of the Serbs to surge and complete the occupation of
Bosnia-Herzegovina.
Given the long history of Sarajevo's use of self-inflicted "Serb mortar
shells" and other provocations in order to instigate US reaction and use of
force, another provocation, this time against the US forces, should not be ruled
out particularly given the large number of Islamist mujahedin still in
Bosnia-Herzegovina who would relish such an opportunity.
The second scenario anticipates that the Bosnian Serbs will fracture, and, in
the aftermath of riots and chaos as a result of infighting, will succumb to
S-FOR and later Muslim forces imposing the implementation of the Dayton-Paris
Accords. Recently, this scenario has become a near reality.
Preparations For War
BY MID-September 1997, Sarajevo was actively preparing for the resumption of war
in Bosnia-Herzegovina as early as the Spring or Summer of 1998. The character
and key operations of this war have all but been determined. The final date will
be decided on the basis of one criteria: whether the US forces will remain in
Bosnia past July 1998, and hence whether Sarajevo should wait for their
withdrawal before launching the war.
The preferences of the Clinton Administration concerning the timing of the war
are taken into consideration because the Izetbegovic Administration would not
like to lose the US support. Sarajevo maintains that Izetbegovic was assured by
the highest possible echelons of the Clinton Administration that if the Dayton
process collapses, the West would facilitate the Bosnian Muslims'
"reunification" of Bosnia-Herzegovina by force of arms. Indeed, the
entire US-sponsored "Train and Equip" program was organized toward
this end. As far as Sarajevo is concerned, the program's objective has been, in
the words of a senior official in Sarajevo, to enable the Bosnian Muslim forces
"to attack the Serbs when the US troops leave Bosnia in June 1998". As
was the case with the violations of the arms embargo on the Bosnian Muslims
before late 1995, the US-led West now looks the other way as Arab and Muslim
states exceed international quotas with their contribution of weapons and
ammunition to the Bosnian Muslim armed forces.
Little wonder that Sarajevo is confident the Clinton Administration will at the
least tacitly support the next war. High-level Bosnian Muslim sources insist
that "during the peace talks in Dayton, the Bosniak politicians were told
from a very high-ranking position in the US Administration that the alternative
to non-implementation of the peace agreement is that the West is giving the
Bosniaks a chance to militarily reintegrate some parts of Serb Republic. After
all, this is the silent 'Annex' of the Dayton Agreement or the so-called 'Dayton
2.'" The build-up and training of the Bosnian Muslim armed forces is built
around the concept of "when we attack the Serbs"; there is no
"if" in that frame of reference.
Sarajevo's contingency plans call for a major swift offensive to occupy the
eastern parts of Bosnia-Herzegovina. Officially, this approach is justified by
the claim that these territories in the eastern part of the Serb Republic used
to have a Bosnian Muslim majority before the war. In order to ensure support in
the West, the offensive will be justified as facilitating the return of Muslim
refugees -- all "victims of Serb ethnic cleansing and atrocities", of
course -- to the key cities and villages in the area. The Bosnian Muslim
offensive is modeled, both strategically and politically, on the Croat Storm
offensive of 1995 in which the entire Krajina Serb population was evicted by
force and sent into exile with tacit US endorsement. Significantly, the bulk of
the planned Bosnian Muslim offensive operations will take place in the US zone.
The key military maneuvers are based on twin pincers and a series of follow-up
"mop-up" operations: Sarajevo's euphemism for ethnic cleansing of
Bosnian Serbs.
The major pincer will be based on (1) the Tuzla-based forces surging from the
Kalesija area, and making a south-east arch along the border with Yugoslavia,
capturing such key strategic cities as Zvornik, Bratunac, Srebrenica,
Zepa, and up-to the northern approaches Visegrad; and (2) the Gorazde-based
forces surging eastward and southwards, capturing the entire area leading to the
Yugoslav border between Foca, and the Piva River in the south to the southern
approaches to Visegrad in the east. Then, a series of swift mop-up operations
launched along a wide front from Sarajevo to Kalesija will push the Bosnian Serb
population from the Serb pocket of Han Pijesak, Pale, Sokoc, and Rogatica
eastward through the Visegrad corridor (which explains why both pincers only
approach the city) to Yugoslavia. Sarajevo is convinced that just as the West
tolerated the mass eviction of the Krajina Serbs in the 1995 operation Storm,
it will tolerate the emptying of eastern Bosnia-Herzegovina from Serbs as long
as their eviction is completed swiftly and resolutely. Sarajevo is convinced
that lacking any major economic and political viability on its own, the rest of
Serb south-eastern Bosnia-Herzegovina will succumb without the need for a direct
military occupation.
The second pincer will be smaller but strategically crucial: (1) The northern
arm will surge just east of Brcko and will advance eastwards along the Sava
River to the northeast corner of Bosnia-Herzegovina; and (2) the southern arm
will surge from the Krstac-Teocak area and advance northwards along the Drina
River until joining up with the first arm. This maneuver will completely
separate the Bosnian Serbs from on-land links with Yugoslavia.
The success of the north-eastern surge will enable Sarajevo to be generous with
the Bosnian Serbs under President Biljana Plavsic. With the strategic importance
of Brcko lost, the Bosnian Serbs would be permitted to retain control, as long
as large numbers of Bosnian Muslim refugees are permitted to return. Senior
officials in Sarajevo insist that the Clinton Administration has assured them
that the US will deliver the western parts of the Bosnian Serbs, under the
leadership of Mrs Plavsic, without the need for a major offensive and
occupation. The recent US blatant intervention in Bosnian Serb inner politics
under the excuse of pursuing "war criminals" has begun the fracturing,
suppressing and conditioning of the Bosnian Serbs. In the aftermath of the
forthcoming war, the western Bosnian Serbs will be completely isolated from the
rest of the Serbs, and with their leadership completely demoralized, the Serbs
will acquiesce to the position of a protectorate of sort rather than face the
fate of their brethren in eastern Bosnia or the Krajina. This way, the senior
officials in Sarajevo point out, Sarajevo would be able to pretend that a
multinational state based on the Dayton Accords and that is not inherently
anti-Serb is being built in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
As for the Croat-dominated parts of Bosnia-Herzegovina, senior officials in
Sarajevo acknowledge that Sarajevo has been advised by what they term
"Christian Europe" to not even contemplate challenging the de facto
annexation of these areas by Croatia. Be happy with the decimation of the Serbs
and forget about the Croats, Sarajevo was told in no uncertain terms.
By mid-September, Izetbegovic's Sarajevo was confident that it had already won
US approval and support for a military surge in order to complete the
subjugation of the Bosnian Serbs before the Summer of 1998. Recently, senior
officials in Sarajevo brought up the possibility of such an offensive in a
discussion with a senior "Western" diplomat. "We would officially
condemn, but we would understand and we would probably not undertake any
efficient steps," a high-ranking "Western" diplomat assured
Sarajevo. "This is exactly what we expect. There is a real possibility. If
the West does not gather the courage to arrest the war criminals, if the return
of the refugees is not made possible before the US troops withdraw, and if there
are no real possibilities for a practical application of the local election
results, then a military intervention similar to the Storm operation is
quite a real possibility. Who can forbid the Bosniaks to take what is, first of
all, morally theirs?"
Hence, both senior Bosnian Muslim officials in Sarajevo and senior Arab
officials consulted with concede, the only question which remains to be resolved
is when to surge forward. Presently, the majority opinion is that Sarajevo
should wait for the replacement of S-FOR with a new US-dominated international
force which will be far more supportive of their "cause".
Already aimed to stay "indefinitely" in Bosnia-Herzegovina, this new
force will serve as an umbrella protecting the gains of the Bosnian Muslim
offensive from a hardly-possible Yugoslav retaliation or any other adverse
repercussions. However, these senior Bosnian Muslim officials in Sarajevo and
senior Arab officials stress, Sarajevo and its Muslim backers are determined to
"decisively resolve the Serb problem" soon, and, therefore, if
Washington changes its mind about the forthcoming offensive, "appropriate
means" would be found to expedite the withdrawal of US forces. These
"means", it can be surmised, are spectacular terrorist strikes by the
numerous Islamist mujahedin still in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
The result of the crisis in Bosnia-Herzegovina, according to both Sarajevo and
the Clinton Administration, is the emergence of a need for a US-led and
dominated international force to secure the new order in Bosnia-Herzegovina
until the Izetbegovic Administration is capable of consolidating an Islamist
administration over a country with a Christian majority (both Serbs and Croats)
and a large base of secularized Bosnian Muslims. Given the inevitable widespread
resistance to the Islamicization of Bosnia-Herzegovina, US forces would have to
remain there "indefinitely" in order to impose a government closer in
spirit and political loyalty to the mullahs' Tehran than to Washington
DC.