Christopher, Do you really think that if we keep on bombing, there will be any chance that the Kosovo refugees will be resettled satisfactorily any time in their lifetimes?
I honestly do.
With a person like that, negotiations must be conducted from a point of strength, not partnership, and definitely not weakness.
We dictate the terms - not him. The sooner he understands that, the better. There's no reason to have the U.N. become involved in negotiations until he comes fully to this realization. The bombing of infrastructure has brought him closer to this realization, but he's not there yet.
The Kosovar refugees are why we cannot turn back. For all practical purposes, the reef's already been sunk. Bill Clinton and Sandy Berger blew it. The very acts they theoretically were supposed to prevent from occurring in fact occurred as a direct result of their preventative measures.
My point is only that between a host of evils - getting Milosivic as close to full capitulation as possible in a manner that minimizes collateral damage to Serbian civilians at this point seems like the best way to iron out a settlement agreement that will prevent a repeat years from now. At this point NATO needs full capitulation to its terms. Anything short of that is unsatisfactory.
I think you can get that without having U.S. troops there for the next 40 years. The way you do that is to keep the heat up and sacrifice any short-term political harm for the long-term.
What's happening is heart-breaking. I wish I knew what the best answer is.
Respectuflly,
Tom |
