Let Bosnia defend itself

The Senate and the Clinton administration are headed in opposite directions on Bosnia. The Senate approved by a veto- proof 69-29 margin Wednesday a bill sponsored by Bob Dole and Joseph Lieberman scheduling an end to American compliance with the U.N. embargo on arms sales to Bosnia, a step that would speed the withdrawal of U.N. troops from that country.

Meanwhile, the administration is pressing its European allies to widen the scope of a threatened NATO bombing campaign intended to keep the United Nations from withdrawing.

The administration's desire to look forceful is understandable. But the Senate's position is more in tune with the underlying realities, and American public opinion. The way to restore coherence to American policy is for the administration to change course and follow the Senate's lead.

Instead, the White House threatens to veto the Dole-Lieberman measure if it is approved by the House, a virtual certainty. The bill provides for ending the arms embargo either immediately upon the withdrawal of UN troops or 12 weeks after the Bosnian government requests such a withdrawal.

To protect withdrawing troops from possible Serbian reprisals, it allows the president to postpone the lifting for successive 30-day periods until a safe evacuation has been achieved.

The administration argues that lifting the embargo would Americanize the war, increase the violence and destroy any hope for a negotiated settlement. It also fears that it will be called on to redeem its pledge of sending up to 25,000 American troops to help extricate UN forces.

Rather than Americanize the war, lifting the embargo would put its future course in Bosnian hands, where it belongs. Until now, it has been in the hands of outside powers. These, having chosen not to fight for a victimized people, have also failed to remain truly neutral.

The embargo, while it formally bars arms sales to all forces in the former Yugoslavia, does nothing to restrain the well-armed Serbian attackers of Bosnian cities, who got all the heavy arms they needed at the outset of the war from the old Yugoslav army. It has only restrained the more numerous, but underarmed, Bosnian defenders.

As for the administration's other arguments, it need only be noted that violence against civilians has been increasing sharply even with the embargo in place. The prospects for a negotiated settlement are next to nil. Concern about having to supply the troops Clinton pledged to a withdrawal is understandable, but an odd argument for the administration itself to be making.

Besides, far fewer than 25,000 Americans might be needed if the administration insists that peacekeepers leave behind whatever weapons they could not readily destroy.

The patent unfairness of the arms embargo has contributed to the cynicism with which many Americans have come to view Bosnia and, increasingly, international affairs in general.

This cynicism, and the apathy it feeds, now cast a greater cloud on America's future world role than almost any possible outcome of the Bosnian fighting.

Lifting the embargo at the behest of Congress would be a political embarrassment for the administration and would complicate Washington's already strained relationships with its European allies. But it is the right thing to do, both for Bosnia and for the United States.

-- The New York Times