President Decides to Commit U.S. Military Forces to Bosnia : Balkans: Allies’ consent sought but Clinton is ready to act unilaterally, Christopher indicates. Steps may include air strikes and a lifting of arms embargo. But no deadline has been set.

President Clinton has decided to commit U.S. military forces to try to end the civil war in Bosnia, and his secretary of state indicated Saturday for the first time that the Administration is prepared to take action without allied consent.

In a momentous four-hour White House meeting Saturday with his principal national security advisers, Clinton resolved that additional actions must be taken to contain the fighting in Bosnia-Herzegovina, “including military steps,” according to Secretary of State Warren Christopher.

Christopher, briefing reporters after the meeting, did not specify what actions would be taken, but they are likely to include lifting the arms embargo on Bosnia’s Muslims, an act requiring U.N. Security Council authorization, and selective U.S. air strikes on Serbian artillery positions and supply lines in Bosnia.

Although Christopher again ruled out the introduction of “large numbers” of U.S. ground troops, a Pentagon official disclosed later that Clinton had on Saturday authorized the use of covert special operations forces as part of any military intervention to provide intelligence and serve as spotters for air or missile strikes.

Christopher would not say when the U.S. military operation might begin, leaving open the possibility that Clinton could be dissuaded from action if rebel Bosnian Serbs comply with U.N. mandates or if Europe rigidly opposes the plan.

The Administration decided to take stronger steps despite the rebel Serbs’ return to the bargaining table with Bosnian Muslim and Croatian leaders in Greece this weekend. Christopher said that the Serbs would have to do more than simply sign the peace plan that the Muslims and Croats have already initialed to forestall American military action. The rebels have reneged back on signed promises before.

Christopher also said the President does not plan to tell the American people about the Administration plan until after a new round of consultations with European leaders, beginning today. The secretary of state left Washington on Saturday night to discuss the American plan with leaders in London, Paris, Moscow, Bonn and Brussels, where NATO has its headquarters.

Clinton planned a series of telephone conversations with European heads of government, including Russian President Boris N. Yeltsin, beginning Saturday afternoon, a White House official said.

“This problem is at the heart of Europe’s future,” Christopher said. “Our efforts will be undertaken with our partners. We’re ready to play our part, but others must be as well.”

Christopher said that he hopes to win allied assent to the American plan of action but that the Europeans would “by no means” have veto power over it. He indicated that the United States was prepared to act unilaterally if necessary.

“We’re proceeding on our own track,” he said. “We’re not going to be diverted from that track.”

U.S. allies have expressed reticence about tougher measures, fearing a backlash against British, French and Canadian peacekeeping troops on the ground in the Balkans. Russian support is critical because of its influence in the United Nations and its traditional ties with Serbian Slavs.

A White House aide said congressional leaders would be consulted on the planned military operation “at some point.” But the aide refused to say whether Clinton would seek a formal congressional authorization for the anticipated overseas military action.

Under the U.S. 1973 War Powers Act, a President is required to report to Congress when he introduces U.S. forces into hostile situations--although presidents have often ignored the law, and its constitutional foundation has never been tested in court. The act also imposes a 60-day time limit on the commitment of forces without congressional authorization.

The success of the talks at Vouliagmeni, a seaside resort 12 miles south of Athens, hinges on Bosnian Serbs’ accepting the division of Bosnia into 10 semi-autonomous regions, as called for by a peace plan negotiated by former U.S. Secretary of State Cyrus R. Vance, representing the United Nations, and European Community mediator Lord Owen.

Owen expressed optimism that the weekend conference would lead to the end of the war. “Peace, which has so long eluded the former Yugoslavia, is now, I think, within our grasp if only everyone has the courage to seize it,” he said.

Owen had warned Clinton earlier against acting precipitously while the talks still held out hope of success. But Clinton said Friday he believed that U.S. talk of possible military action in Bosnia had pushed the Serbs back to the bargaining table.

President Slobodan Milosevic of Serbia, who a week ago publicly urged the Bosnian Serbs to accept the Vance-Owen plan, arrived to take part in the Athens talks, saying he wanted “to make a decisive step forward,” Reuters news service reported.

Bosnian Serb chief Radovan Karadzic said that his forces are ready “for immediate and unconditional peace,” the news agency said. But Karadzic made clear he would be seeking changes in the plan, which he described as “70% to 80% acceptable regarding territories.”

Christopher said the United States and the rest of the world have lost patience with the Serbs, who have pursued a policy of murderous “ethnic cleansing” of Muslims in Serb-dominated regions of Bosnia. “We’re tired of their words and manipulation,” he said.

Saturday’s White House announcement was clearly part of the campaign to pressure the Serbs. Although military action was promised, its nature and timing were left unspecified.

Christopher said the United States wants to see “deeds, immediate concrete action” on the ground to prove the Serbs’ good faith. Those actions include the immediate cessation of bombardment of civilian areas, an end to harassment of humanitarian aid convoys and a halt to atrocities against civilians, Christopher said.

“The clock is ticking,” he said. But he refused to set a deadline, saying that the timing of U.S. action would be set after he returns from Europe to discuss with Clinton how the allies reacted to the plan and whether they would participate in any military operation.

A senior White House aide acknowledged that while Clinton had decided on “a general direction” for U.S. policy in the Balkans, “there is a scenario under which we would reconsider.” It involves an immediate halt to Serbian military operations or overwhelming European opposition to the American plan.

Susan L. Woodward of Washington’s Brookings Institution, an expert on the former Yugoslav federation, praised Christopher’s statement, saying “it sent a very specific message to the Serbs on what they have to do.”

Woodward said Clinton already has enough support from Britain and France to threaten limited air strikes. “The main question is whether that threat, in the course of a week’s discussion, will be strong enough to get the Serbs to do what the United States wants,” she said.

Christopher said the U.S. decision was driven by humanitarian concerns raised by the Bosnian civil war, which has already taken a toll of an estimated 150,000 dead and missing, most of them civilians.

He also said the United States had a “fundamental strategic interest” in assuring that the conflict does not spread to the Serbian province of Kosovo and the republic of Macedonia and potentially into Greece and Turkey.

A senior White House official, asked to spell out the strategic rationale for U.S. intervention, said, “I think that basically no one, the United States or Europe, can afford to let the conflict widen into a greater Balkan problem. It’s both a U.S. and a European problem because the potential to involve other countries is so great.”

The official could not say where else this principle might be applied or whether Bosnia was seen as a unique and cancerous problem that must be addressed forcefully.

Those participating in the Saturday White House meeting were Clinton; Christopher; Vice President Al Gore; Defense Secretary Les Aspin; Gen. Colin L. Powell, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff; U.N. Ambassador Madeleine Albright; National Security Adviser Anthony Lake; Deputy National Security Adviser Samuel (Sandy) Berger; CIA Director R. James Woolsey; Leon Fuerth, foreign policy adviser to Gore, and Chief of Staff Thomas (Mack) McLarty.

On Capitol Hill, Congress remains deeply divided over U.S. military intervention in Bosnia.

Initial reactions from lawmakers to Christopher’s announcement underscored those divisions, with some calling U.S. military intervention in Bosnia long overdue and others warning, in the words of Sen. Phil Gramm (R-Tex.), that Clinton stands on the threshold of “a vary bad mistake . . . that could become another Vietnam.”

Noting that even the Serbs’ heavy artillery is mobile and could be concealed from the air, Gramm said on CNN’s “Newsmaker Saturday” that air strikes “probably won’t be very effective” and complained that Clinton seems to lack “a coherent end plan” for disengaging from Bosnia once military force is used.

But Rep. Susan Molinari (R-N.Y.), appearing on the same program, said U.S. intervention is overdue. Rejecting the comparison to Vietnam, she said air strikes are needed to force the Serbs to accept a peace settlement before “there are no more Muslims left to argue over.”

Speaking after a campaign appearance in Janesville, Wis., Republican Bob Dole of Kansas, the Senate minority leader, offered his support for both air strikes and lifting the arms embargo if Clinton recommends those actions.

Dole said the urgent task for the President is to “tell the American people as much as we abhor the pictures (of Bosnian suffering) why it is in our national interest to intervene.”

Times staff writers Art Pine, Michael Ross, Doyle McManus and Norman Kempster contributed to this report.