Back Up Bosnia Threat, U.S. Envoy Tells U.N.

Trumpeting the new resolve of the Clinton Administration, U.S. Ambassador Madeleine Albright told the U.N. Security Council on Monday that diplomacy will not stop the slaughter in Sarajevo or the war in Bosnia-Herzegovina unless it is “backed by a willingness to use force.”

In a speech to the council during an unusual public session, the American ambassador also added a new warning to the Bosnian Serbs: that they will face retribution if they attempt to harm foreign relief workers in retaliation for any North Atlantic Treaty Organization air raids.

“The United States will advocate strong action by this council if the Bosnian Serbs follow through on their threats to restrict the movement of international relief workers,” she said.

As more than 40 ambassadors filled the council chamber with rhetoric railing against the savagery in Bosnia, both President Clinton and the United Nations denied reports that the international organization intends to ease NATO’s demand that the Serbs--under threat of air strikes--withdraw all heavy weapons from the Sarajevo area or turn them over to the United Nations by next Monday.

News reports had indicated that some U.N. peacekeeping officers would be satisfied if the Serbs simply left their artillery batteries in place for distant U.N. monitoring by radar.

“I expect that the terms of the NATO agreement will be followed,” Clinton told a news conference. “Keep in mind, the secretary general of the United Nations asked us to take action. We agreed to take action. . . . And we were assured all along the way that our allies in NATO and . . . the secretary general agreed. So, I don’t believe there is a fundamental misunderstanding on that point.”

Joe Sills, spokesman for Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali, said in a news briefing at U.N. headquarters that “there is no difference in the goals being pursued by the U.N. and NATO.”

That seemed underscored in Sarajevo, where Lt. Gen. Michael Rose of Britain, commander of U.N. forces in Bosnia, said that “the total exclusion zone for heavy weapons around Sarajevo will be implemented” before the end of the week and that “any heavy weapons there will be either under U.N. control or subject of an air attack.”

The Serbs, however, were a long way from turning over their weapons. Two artillery pieces were handed to peacekeepers Monday, bringing the total under U.N. control to 28. Some analysts estimate that the Serbs have more than 500 heavy weapons around Sarajevo.

U.S. officials said in Washington that the few pieces of artillery and other heavy weapons that the Serbs had turned in during the previous 24 hours were “not significant.” “Most of what they were turning in was old, not serviceable,” one said. “All we’ve really deprived them of is spare parts.”

Meanwhile, Charles Redman, special U.S. envoy to the Bosnia peace talks in Geneva, met with Bosnian President Alija Izetbegovic in Sarajevo at the start of a two-day visit.

It is assumed that Redman is trying to explore all facets of Bosnia’s bargaining position at the negotiations. The Clinton Administration, while calling for air strikes in Sarajevo if the Serbs fail to withdraw or neutralize their heavy weapons, has promised its European allies, in a change of policy, to take an active part in the peace negotiations.

In a related development, the German government announced the arrest in Munich of 38-year-old Dusko Tadic, a Bosnian Serb prison guard accused of torturing and murdering Muslims in Bosnian detention camps. In denouncing the alleged crimes of Tadic and others like him in Bosnia, the German Federal Prosecutor’s Office said, “Through murder, rape, deportation and the obliteration of whole villages, those responsible are pursuing a goal of decimating the non-Serb populace.”

The public debate in the Security Council was called at the request of Bosnia and several nonaligned governments to discuss the situation in the wake of the bloody massacre in a Sarajevo marketplace Feb. 5.

Russian diplomats joined in the request, seeking to discuss their proposal for a U.N. administration in Sarajevo. The council agreed to allow any U.N. member to speak, but it ruled that no resolution would be taken up at the session.

The meeting began with Bosnia’s U.N. ambassador, Muhamed Sacirbey, hailing the threat of air strikes. “For those who only understand the language of force and the logic of war,” he said, “this step will be the first to counter their aggression and terrorism.”

Fears had arisen last week that Russian Ambassador Yuli Vorontsov would use a council meeting to try to eliminate the threat to bomb artillery positions of the Serbs, who are longtime political and cultural allies of Russia. But, in the face of NATO solidarity, the Russians abandoned the maneuver at the end of last week, and Vorontsov told the council that a Russian proposal for a U.N. administration in Sarajevo is a complement to the air strike threat, not a substitute.

The Russian position drew praise from both Albright and French Ambassador Jean-Bernard Merimee. “We are happy to state that we share the same position,” Merimee told Vorontsov.

In fact, the good feelings expressed in the Security Council even enveloped the United States and France. The two nations had been jousting over Bosnia policy several weeks ago. But they embraced each other’s positions after the Sarajevo marketplace massacre enraged the world and persuaded leaders in both countries that something had to be done.

British Ambassador David Hannay sounded a central theme of the session when he stressed that, while the threat of air strikes is real, the need for a negotiated settlement is vital.

“Delay and procrastination do not, in Bosnia, lead to things getting better,” he said. “They lead to them getting worse.”

Times staff writer Art Pine contributed to this report.