Glimmer of peace

NATO's bombs have brought quick, if precarious, results. The air campaign was tentatively suspended Friday after the big guns terrorizing Sarajevo had been temporarily quieted and the foreign ministers of Serbia, Bosnia and Croatia agreed to begin talks in Geneva next week on an American proposal for a compromise peace.

Those are encouraging developments in what has been an intractable war. But the talks may proceed slowly and progress could be disrupted by provocations from any side. If meaningful negotiations are now about to begin, however, it is not simply because the West got tough with the Serbs. It is because the West got tough at a moment when the military and political balance had begun to shift against Serb leaders who wanted to keep fighting.

Clear evidence for that was this week's muscling aside of the uncompromising Bosnian Serb political leader, Radovan Karadzic, by Serbia's president, Slobodan Milosevic. Milosevic was long the real power behind the scenes. Now he has stepped forward to negotiate on the Bosnian Serbs' behalf. Milosevic is among those most responsible for launching the Bosnian war. But he now wants to win relief from the UN economic sanctions on Serbia and seems willing to give up some Bosnian Serb-held territory to achieve this.

The Geneva talks will be based on a longstanding international proposal to maintain Bosnian sovereignty by partitioning its territory, allocating 51 percent to Moslems and Croats and 49 percent to Bosnian Serbs. Right now, Serb forces occupy about 70 percent of Bosnia. The Moslems and Croats have agreed to the 51- 49 proposal for more than a year. Milosevic and NATO's bombs seem to have brought the Bosnian Serbs around this week, although they still say they view the international proposal only as a starting point for talks.

Washington took charge of outside diplomatic efforts last month. America's chief negotiator, Assistant Secretary of State Richard Holbrooke, suggests that modifications to the original peace proposal are possible, but rightly insists on maintaining the 51-49 ratio unless the parties themselves agree otherwise. That leaves a lot to negotiate about.

In theory, there is nothing wrong with territorial adjustments to the peace map to take account of new military realities and to establish defensible territorial zones. But those adjustments must be acceptable to all sides, not just the Serbs. Similarly, any arrangements allowing Bosnian Serbs to confederate with Serbia or Bosnian Croats with Croatia cannot permit Bosnia to be carved up and devoured by its two stronger neighbors.

If a settlement proceeds, there will be a need to discuss international monitoring. There will have to be guarantees for the rights of all groups, Serbs included, to live free of intimidation and reprisals. But the Clinton administration has been far too hasty in committing itself to deploy thousands of American troops for this purpose. Surely European forces, who have borne most of the peacekeeping duties, should take the lead on monitoring as well. Any American deployment would require congressional approval, which is far from certain.

NATO's bombing campaign was justified as a way to try to protect civilians in Sarajevo and bring the Bosnian Serbs into peace talks based on the 51-49 formula. Surprisingly quickly, both of those objectives now seem within reach.

-- The New York Times