Clinton’s Bosnia Plan Expected on Saturday

President Clinton, torn between painful choices on what to do about the slaughter in Bosnia-Herzegovina, summoned senior foreign and military advisers to the White House on Thursday for continuing consultations on the possible use of U.S. military force against Bosnian Serbs fighting there.

A decision on a new Bosnia policy is expected Saturday after a final White House meeting with advisers. Secretary of State Warren Christopher then will fly to European capitals to explain the policy to allied leaders and seek their support.

Clinton is determined to take a more aggressive role in seeking to end the civil war in Bosnia, but the European allies as well as a majority of the top brass in the Pentagon are warning him that the Balkans present an inescapable political and military morass.

Clinton is agonizing over the decision, aides say, knowing that a wrong move could engulf his young Administration in a deadly and distracting quagmire.

“Everybody agrees that there is no clear, good course of action,” said White House Press Secretary Dee Dee Myers. “There are costs and risks with every decision.”

However, she added, “the one thing that’s clear is the President firmly believes we must take more action to stop ‘ethnic cleansing’ and to stop Serbian aggression in Bosnia.”

Clinton met late Thursday with Christopher, Defense Secretary Les Aspin, Chairman Colin L. Powell of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and other military leaders. An enlarged decision-making body known as the Principals Group, which includes those officials and Vice President Al Gore, White House National Security Adviser Anthony Lake and Madeleine Albright, ambassador to the United Nations, is to meet Saturday morning.

Powell said after Thursday’s meeting that Clinton and the military leaders had discussed a range of options and that the only possibility excluded from consideration was the use of American ground forces.

“I would just characterize it as a full discussion of a wide range of military options as well as consideration of the current diplomatic situation,” Powell told reporters.

He said that “we haven’t ruled anything off the table” other than the deployment of ground troops.

Clinton has insisted that the new policy will include participation by U.S. allies, but there is no assurance that he can win their agreement to a controversial policy that may include arming Bosnia’s Muslims or mounting air strikes against Serbian artillery emplacements.

The other principal option under consideration in Washington is the use of military force to establish safe areas for Bosnians fleeing the factional bloodshed.

Clinton is involved in intensive consultations with Congress and U.N. allies over his future course because virtually any action would require congressional or U.N. approval. He has also spoken with former President Richard Nixon and former Secretary of State George P. Shultz, aides said.

Clinton would need U.N. assent to lift the arms embargo on Bosnia. In 1991, the United Nations imposed an embargo on weapons sales to all parties fighting in the former Yugoslav federation, crippling the Bosnian fighters but having little effect on the rebel Serbs because they get weapons supplies from the former Yugoslav army.

And if Clinton was to send U.S. warplanes to strike Serbian forces, he probably would be compelled to seek congressional approval under the War Powers Act, which requires a vote in Congress on any large or protracted deployment of U.S. forces overseas. Ninety-one House members Thursday sent Clinton a letter urging him to comply with the law if he decides to dispatch U.S. troops or aircraft for combat in the Balkans.

Former Presidents Ronald Reagan and George Bush ignored the war powers resolution in numerous military operations, saying that it was an unconstitutional infringement on executive authority.

But White House Communications Director George Stephanopoulos said that Clinton is committed--at least in theory--to observing the letter and spirit of the War Powers Act.

After a decision is reached, Stephanopoulos said, Clinton will “go before the American people and explain what he wants to do and why he wants to do it. . . . One of the lessons, obviously, of Vietnam and other conflicts is that you need the sustained support of the American people . . . to have a successful venture.”

Securing European support may prove even more difficult than persuading the American public that military action is justified.

Britain, France and Canada all have repeated their opposition to lifting the arms embargo but said they are willing to discuss other measures with the United States.

Some foreign officials said that their governments are reluctant to back allied air strikes in Bosnia or Serbia--but are willing to discuss the option.

A major concern of all three governments is that any tougher action would endanger the British, French, Canadian and Spanish troops carrying out U.N. peacekeeping and relief missions on the ground.

“We are prepared to support stronger action to bring the Serbs to the table,” a senior Canadian official said. “But our government is still opposed to lifting the arms embargo.”

In a round of telephone consultations, Christopher talked Wednesday and Thursday with British Foreign Secretary Douglas Hurd, French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe, German Foreign Minister Klaus Kinkel, Russian Foreign Minister Andrei V. Kozyrev and Canadian External Affairs Minister Barbara Jean McDougall.

A French Foreign Ministry spokesman said that Paris believes the allies should wait to see if new economic sanctions introduced against Serbia this week have some effect.

“Any other measures should be discussed with consideration that there are troops on the ground and that we still do not know whether the disagreement between the Serbian government and the Bosnian Serbs will have any effect,” a French diplomat here said. But France “is not ruling out any option,” he added.

A British official said his government remains skeptical but is actively discussing the option of air strikes with the Administration. Hurd said Sunday: “Take air strikes. This is not something that can be agreed in principle without agreement on your objectives, what resources you need, what is the legal basis in international law and what effect it will have on the humanitarian effort in Bosnia and the troops already there.”