Lack of Kosovo Exit Strategy Worries Many -- 03/25/1999

Lack of Kosovo Exit Strategy Worries Many

25 March, 1999

By Lawrence Morahan
CNS Staff Writer

(CNS) – As U.S.-led NATO warplanes strike Serb forces in Kosovo, many conservative lawmakers, not to mention Republican presidential candidates, are critical of what they see as undefined U.S. foreign policy objectives and the lack of a coherent exit strategy from the Balkans.

"An administration should be guided by a particular foreign policy doctrine," Jonathan Baron, a spokesman for Republican presidential contender Dan Quayle, told CNS. "There is no Clinton doctrine. There is no clear set of standards. Therefore, decisions are made on emotion rather than on fact or what's in the best interest of the nation, and that in [Quayle's] view is a very unfortunate circumstance," Baron said.

Quayle strongly criticized President Clinton's personal handling of the crisis on an appearance on Cable News Network.

"If we had a strong, decisive commander-in-chief, with a strong foreign policy, I am convinced we wouldn't be on the verge of basically going to war over there," Quayle said. "You have an impeached American president. There is no real political objective that has been stated and [Yugoslav President Milosevic] has tried to take advantage of that."

U.S. policy also came under fire from non-political groups.

"I seriously question what the U.S. is doing here," said Michael Ratner, an attorney with the Center for Constitutional Rights in New York, in an interview with CNS. "And I question that based on why they don't move in other areas. That doesn't mean they're wrong, but you have to ask with great skepticism what the U.S. is doing here. Especially when it may be counter-productive to helping the people of Kosovo."

For years the United States stood by and watched as peaceful protests by Albanians seeking more autonomy in Kosovo began to escalate until ultra-nationalists, such as the Kosovo Liberation Army, began to appear. From there the situation became very violent and eventually got out of hand, due to the fault of many parties, including the United States, Ratner said.

"I'm generally very skeptical about the U.S.'s use of force because I find it so selective," Ratner said.

Ratner also questions the administration's claim that the attacks on the Serbs comes from a humanitarian motive – to halt Serb atrocities against defenseless civilians. This claim is undercut by the U.S. policy regarding the Kurds.

"The U.S. has continued to arm Turkey while [Turkey] is perpetrating atrocoties against the Kurds, and has remained silent in the face of demands for legitimate Kurdish autonomy. So that makes me question why we are really using this force. Is it really for humanitarian interests? I don't believe it," Ratner said.

This point also was underscored by Republican presidential contender Patrick Buchanan.

"What has Milosevic done to the Albanians that Mr. Clinton's 'strategic partners' in Beijing have not done to the Tibetans?" Buchanan said in a statement.

The real objectives of the U.S. are strategic, with possible plans to establish a military base in the region and make sure the U.S. remains the only superpower. Russia, with its dependence on Western loans, is unable to confront the United States directly, however, it can threaten the U.S. surreptitiously, Ratner said.

"Witness Russia's attempt to supply the Serbs with an arms shipment through Azerbaijan," Ratner said.

While voicing strong support for U.S. troops, especially those in harm's way, conservatives criticized the administration's actions.

"If Mr. Clinton orders U.S. air power or ground troops into action in Kosovo without congressional authorization, he will have launched an illegal, presidential war," Buchanan said.

"America has no vital interest in whose flag flies over Kosovo's capital, and no right to attack and kill Serb soldiers fighting on their own soil to preserve the territorial integrity of their own country," Buchanan said.

"President Clinton's Kosovo policy has thus far been one of incoherence and vacillation," GOP presidential contender Gary Bauer told CNS in a statement. "I oppose NATO bombing in Yugoslavia because the president has failed to make the case for American involvement to both Congress and the American people.

"I am concerned that there is no long-range strategy for ending U.S. involvement in the Balkans once American force is committed in the region," Bauer said.

| In Depth Archives |