-> SNETNEWS Mailing List Hell no, Bill wouldn't go - But He'll send your kids to Kosovo! ************************************ Clinton Joins Allies on Ground Troops NATO to Weigh Conditions of Kosovo Mission By William Drozdiak and Thomas W. Lippman Washington Post Staff Writers Friday, April 23, 1999; Page A01 As NATO heads of government gathered for a 50th-anniversary summit meeting dominated by the crisis in Kosovo, President Clinton yesterday joined the leaders of France and Britain in supporting dispatch of an international military force into Kosovo without the explicit assent of Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic. Conditions under which the alliance should consider sending ground troops into Kosovo were expected to be a major subject of discussion in a three-hour emergency session set for Friday morning by NATO's 19 heads of government seeking to define their options in the next phase of the conflict with Yugoslavia. The allies so far have insisted that ground troops would be introduced only in a "permissive environment," meaning with the avowed consent of the Yugoslav government. But with Milosevic still rejecting foreign troops despite 30 days of bombing, the leading NATO powers have been exploring ways an international force could supervise the return of ethnic Albanian refugees to their homes in Kosovo even in the absence of Belgrade's cooperation. As the allied leaders gathered here to ponder their next moves, Russia's special envoy and former prime minister Viktor Chernomyrdin held extensive talks in Belgrade with Milosevic and later told reporters that the Yugoslav leader is ready to accept an "international presence" in the embattled Serbian province under United Nations auspices. But it was unclear whether this meant Belgrade would budge from its refusal to accept foreign troops or whether it only referred to unarmed observers. With NATO airstrikes heading into a second month and Milosevic showing no signs of backing down, allied leaders were expected to consider fresh ways to augment an intensified bombing campaign now being carried out by more than 1,000 aircraft, but which has nonetheless failed to deter Yugoslav forces from pressing ahead with the mass expulsion of ethnic Albanians. After meeting Clinton at the White House, NATO Secretary General Javier Solana expressed satisfaction with the air operation so far. He said allied warplanes have carried out some 9,000 sorties over the past four weeks, significantly weakening Yugoslav air defenses, command and control systems and the capacity to produce fuel and ammunition. But in many respects, the bombing campaign has fallen short of its key objectives. NATO airstrikes have failed to prod Milosevic into calling off his crackdown in Kosovo and accepting a peace settlement that would restore autonomy to ethnic Albanians. While Yugoslav forces have consolidated their grip over the province, the mass expulsions of refugees have come perilously close to destabilizing the neighboring states of Albania and Macedonia. Clinton Joins Allies on Ground Troops NATO to Weigh Conditions of Kosovo Mission By William Drozdiak and Thomas W. Lippman Washington Post Staff Writers Friday, April 23, 1999; Page A01 As NATO heads of government gathered for a 50th-anniversary summit meeting dominated by the crisis in Kosovo, President Clinton yesterday joined the leaders of France and Britain in supporting dispatch of an international military force into Kosovo without the explicit assent of Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic. Conditions under which the alliance should consider sending ground troops into Kosovo were expected to be a major subject of discussion in a three-hour emergency session set for Friday morning by NATO's 19 heads of government seeking to define their options in the next phase of the conflict with Yugoslavia. The allies so far have insisted that ground troops would be introduced only in a "permissive environment," meaning with the avowed consent of the Yugoslav government. But with Milosevic still rejecting foreign troops despite 30 days of bombing, the leading NATO powers have been exploring ways an international force could supervise the return of ethnic Albanian refugees to their homes in Kosovo even in the absence of Belgrade's cooperation. As the allied leaders gathered here to ponder their next moves, Russia's special envoy and former prime minister Viktor Chernomyrdin held extensive talks in Belgrade with Milosevic and later told reporters that the Yugoslav leader is ready to accept an "international presence" in the embattled Serbian province under United Nations auspices. But it was unclear whether this meant Belgrade would budge from its refusal to accept foreign troops or whether it only referred to unarmed observers. With NATO airstrikes heading into a second month and Milosevic showing no signs of backing down, allied leaders were expected to consider fresh ways to augment an intensified bombing campaign now being carried out by more than 1,000 aircraft, but which has nonetheless failed to deter Yugoslav forces from pressing ahead with the mass expulsion of ethnic Albanians. After meeting Clinton at the White House, NATO Secretary General Javier Solana expressed satisfaction with the air operation so far. He said allied warplanes have carried out some 9,000 sorties over the past four weeks, significantly weakening Yugoslav air defenses, command and control systems and the capacity to produce fuel and ammunition. But in many respects, the bombing campaign has fallen short of its key objectives. NATO airstrikes have failed to prod Milosevic into calling off his crackdown in Kosovo and accepting a peace settlement that would restore autonomy to ethnic Albanians. While Yugoslav forces have consolidated their grip over the province, the mass expulsions of refugees have come perilously close to destabilizing the neighboring states of Albania and Macedonia. When Milosevic and his forces refused to buckle after the first few days of bombing, NATO commanders declared that their strategy would shift from coercion to attrition. They sought to degrade and destroy the Yugoslav armed forces, saying that eventually would force a pullback from Kosovo. Now, there is talk within the alliance about pursuing a sustained bombing campaign to soften up Yugoslav forces and prepare the way for allied ground troops to enter Kosovo in a "non-hostile environment." When asked in Solana's presence if he could envision sending an international security force into Kosovo without Milosevic's approval, Clinton replied: "Well, that's a hypothetical question, but of course there are scenarios under which that could occur." British Defense Minister George Robertson said, "We will need more than 30,000 troops" to enter Kosovo without prior agreement from Belgrade. Robertson, visiting U.S. defense facilities, recalled that Britain recently committed an additional 2,000 armored troops to the 12,000 NATO troops already in Macedonia. "We will need to go in quickly when the circumstances are ripe," said Robertson, although he declined to specify what "ripe" means. "That's a military judgment" that he said is being discussed by NATO's planners. Pentagon spokesman Kenneth Bacon said the ground-troop planning that Solana announced Wednesday will "review the assessments that were done last fall from two perspectives." One involves "permissive entry peacekeeping," he said, and the other involves "sending ground forces into a non-permissive environment." He said each should produce "an estimate of troops that would be required to achieve certain goals," rather than "a firm plan as to what sort of divisions you'd send in; the sequencing of how they'd get there [or] what entry points they would use." One result of last fall's estimates was to produce unanimity in the alliance not to send troops into a "non-permissive environment." That unanimity continues, all alliance officials who spoke publicly yesterday said. The question now is the definition of "permissive environment" -- that is, when would the alliance be satisfied, with or without Milosevic's specific, public assent, that troops could enter Kosovo safely to escort returning refugees? British Foreign Secretary Robin Cook, in a meeting with Washington Post editors and reporters, said in effect that the allies will know that point when they see it. It could come, British and French officials have said, when the air campaign has sufficiently eroded Milosevic's will or ability to resist. The U.S. view, however, is that Milosevic must assent, even if indirectly, and that assent must be verifiable. One way that assent might be delivered, U.S. officials said, could be through Russia. If Milosevic were to tell the Russians he has had enough and the Russians then supported a U.N. Security Council resolution authorizing the international force to enter Kosovo, Washington might be satisfied, officials said. The ground troop debate remains highly controversial within the alliance for legal and political reasons. Many European governments are still uncomfortable with NATO's first assault on a sovereign country in the absence of United Nations authority and in contradiction of the alliance's defensive military posture. And Macedonia, which is considered the best place to launch a ground invasion, is vehemently opposed to seeing its territory used as a launching pad for invasion of Kosovo. Any decision to employ ground troops could also create intolerable pressures on the German government. While Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder has strongly supported NATO's air campaign, a move to send in ground troops would provoke fierce opposition from many of Schroeder's fellow Social Democrats and probably cause the Greens party, the junior partner in the "Red-Green" ruling alliance, to bolt the government. In another move to escalate pressure on Milosevic, the United States is seeking to persuade the allies to impose a blockade against Yugoslavia that would prevent oil supplies from reaching government forces from ports in Montenegro. NATO claims to have destroyed nearly all of Yugoslavia's oil storage depots, but Yugoslav forces in Kosovo still appear to have enough fuel to persist with their "ethnic cleansing" drive. France and other European nations have expressed reservations, claiming that a blockade would be tantamount to a declaration of war that would require U.N. approval. U.S. officials said their reluctance to go along with the blockade has infuriated NATO's chief military commander, Gen. Wesley K. Clark, who is said to believe that the continuing oil deliveries through Montenegro have undercut the targeting strategy against Yugoslavia's fuel supplies. U.S. intelligence sources said Yugoslavia has been receiving oil deliveries from Russia, Ukraine, Greece and possibly other countries through the port of Bar, on the Adriatic Sea in Montenegro, Serbia's junior partner in the Yugoslav federation. The oil goes first to Koper, Slovenia, these sources said, and is unloaded onto smaller vessels, including a tanker named the Kaliope, which is registered under a Bahamian flag to a company named Drawa Shipping. Since the bombing began, U.S. intelligence officials have tracked eight to 10 shipments, totaling an estimated 50,000 metric tons, or about 366,000 barrels, the sources said. Some NATO countries have been reluctant to interdict this traffic by blockading the port of Bar, diplomats and U.S. officials said, either because it would be an overt act of war or because it would undermine the stability of Montenegro, which has a pro-Western, democratically elected government that is not controlled by Milosevic. The European Union agreed yesterday to ban petroleum shipments to Yugoslavia and asked 12 countries seeking membership to join the embargo. The ban, which EU officials said is to take effect Wednesday, would presumably cut off shipments from Greece. "We believe that additional steps can be taken," Albright said, "whereby each country, in interpreting its laws, can in fact search and visit the vessels that are on the Adriatic, which in no way would interfere with neutral shipping. We are looking at a variety of other ways, but I am not prepared to discuss any in more detail." Bard Visit me at: The Center for Exposing Corruption in the Federal Government http://www.xld.com/public/center/center.htm Federal Government defined: ....a benefit/subsidy protection racket! -> Send "subscribe snetnews " to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -> Posted by: "Peter L. Sroufe" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
