NATO Backs U.N. Request for Expanded Air Strikes

NATO agreed in principle on Wednesday to a U.N. request that it expand its use of air power in the war in Bosnia, but the allies are expected to demand greater flexibility and independence as the price for their deeper involvement, alliance officials said.

Speaking after a meeting here of ambassadors to the 16-member North Atlantic Treaty Organization, alliance officials said there had been broad agreement to “respond positively” to a request by U.N. Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali in a letter to his NATO counterpart, Manfred Woerner, on Monday.

In that letter, Boutros-Ghali asked the alliance to be prepared to launch air strikes against tanks, artillery and mortar positions used to attack civilian targets in any of the six U.N.-declared safe areas of war-torn Bosnia-Herzegovina: Gorazde, Sarajevo, Tuzla, Zepa, Srebrenica and Bihac.

The secretary general’s request--and NATO’s decision to respond positively--came against a backdrop of mounting frustration and humiliation across a broad spectrum of industrialized nations at their collective impotence to halt the slaughter of civilians in Bosnia, most recently in the U.N.-declared safe area of Gorazde.

In Washington on Wednesday, President Clinton also proposed a substantial expansion of the use of allied air power in Bosnia and put the Bosnian Serbs on notice that the United States would lead an effort to punish their “brutal” aggression.

As for Gorazde, where intense shelling and combat continued Wednesday, officials expressed little optimism that any Western action will save the besieged enclave with a population now of 65,000.

Despite NATO’s initial positive reaction to the U.N. initiative, officials stressed that any deepening of the alliance’s role in Bosnia would raise an array of difficult military and security questions that could delay--at least briefly--any definitive response.

“It may take a day or two,” Britain’s NATO ambassador, John Weston, told reporters after the meeting. “We have to make a thorough review of everything that’s involved. We’ve got to find a way to respond positively.”

Woerner reportedly conferred by telephone with Boutros-Ghali later in the day, although there were no details immediately available on their discussion.

Adherence to Boutros-Ghali’s request would effectively extend NATO’s mandate--which now protects the civilian population in Sarajevo--to the five other U.N.-declared safe areas of Bosnia. It was a massacre of more than 60 civilians during a Serbian artillery attack on a Sarajevo market on Feb. 5 that led to the capital’s eventual protection. Previously, NATO air strikes could be called only to protect U.N. peacekeepers who came under fire.

There were clear indications here Wednesday that, while prepared to respond to Boutros-Ghali’s call for help, the Atlantic Alliance wanted to loosen constraints that at times have made a farce of its protective role in Bosnia.

Last month, for example, it took more than three hours to get U.N. approval for NATO air strikes requested by a group of French peacekeepers who had come under intense Bosnian Serb fire near the town of Bihac. By the time the authorization finally came, bad weather prohibited any response.

On other occasions, authorized targets have been extremely precise, such as a single Bosnian Serb tank firing on U.N. forces.

NATO officials said they will press for the right to go beyond Boutros-Ghali’s precise request to target only specific weapons determined--by the United Nations--to be responsible for attacks against civilians.

“We want more latitude and flexibility,” stressed an alliance official after Wednesday’s meeting. “It’s not possible to limit this to what Boutros-Ghali says. Our response must be sufficient and credible.

“We want to do something that really hurts,” this official added. “We’re not interested in striking at one tank. We’re talking about going after ammunition dumps and communications centers.”

Another official said that if NATO air strikes are to succeed in deterring attacks on civilian targets, then the number of U.N. peacekeepers in these areas has to increase. “There are more than 4,000 peacekeepers in Sarajevo, but how many were there in Gorazde--100, 150?” this official asked.

An added concern, this source said, is the safety of U.N. peacekeeping units on the ground in the face of more intense air strikes near them. These units are neither equipped for nor expected to engage in heavy combat. Serbian forces have already detained about 150 U.N. peacekeepers in response to limited NATO air strikes in the Gorazde area.

Alliance officials also said they hope to couple any deeper military involvement on their part with attempts to unify diplomatic efforts so that the United Nations, the United States, the European Union, NATO and Russia can work more closely to end the war at the negotiating table.

Russia, which is a traditional ally and has deep-rooted links with the Serbs, has enjoyed some recent diplomatic success in dissuading the Bosnian Serbs from their aggressive action; the Russians, increasingly, have been seen as being important players in any lasting settlement to the Balkans conflict.

But other NATO officials stressed that there had been no discussion of giving Moscow a potential veto over specific alliance military operations.

On Wednesday, Russia continued to pursue a policy of talk, not war. Russian Foreign Minister Andrei V. Kozyrev emerged from a meeting in Moscow late Wednesday with international mediators Lord Owen and Thorvald Stoltenberg to stress that resumed NATO air strikes are not the way “to stop the madness in Gorazde.”

Times staff writers Carol J. Williams in Sarajevo and Sonni Efron in Moscow contributed to this report.