Ground Troops a ‘Last Resort,’ President Says

President Clinton on Saturday narrowed the terms under which he would dispatch U.S. ground troops to Bosnia-Herzegovina, saying they would be sent only “as a last resort” if stranded U.N. peacekeepers needed “an emergency extraction.”

“This would be a limited, temporary operation,” he said. “And we have not been asked to do it. I think it is highly unlikely that we would be asked to do it.”

Devoting his Saturday radio address to a clarification of his controversial Bosnia policy, the President clearly sought to calm fears that he was deepening the United States’ commitment to the raging war in the Balkans.

Only days ago, during a commencement speech to Air Force cadets in Colorado, he startled members of Congress and some of his own political advisers by announcing that he was prepared to send troops to help with “a reconfiguration and a strengthening” of the U.N. peacekeeping force in the former Yugoslav federation.

His words, supported by comments from other White House advisers, seemed to signal an expanded U.S. commitment to aid beleaguered peacekeepers who were being taken hostage by the Bosnian Serbs.

Clinton indicated that U.S. soldiers and helicopters would help the 22,000 peacekeepers--scattered in small units to carry out humanitarian missions--regroup into larger, more secure units.

Top White House aides said Saturday that the President’s remarks had been intended to “buck up the resolve” of wavering European allies that were coming under political pressure to withdraw their forces from Bosnia.

But the statements marked a striking departure from earlier Bosnia policy, which precluded the use of U.S. ground troops and immediately raised concerns that the lives of U.S. soldiers would be risked in combat in Bosnia, something Clinton had promised to avoid.

As if to emphasize the danger, an American F-16C jet was shot down Friday by Bosnian Serbs. The fate of the pilot remains unknown.

On Saturday, the President dropped the talk of helping with a repositioning of U.N. forces and instead emphasized that U.S. troops would only participate in a rescue operation.

“We certainly should not have ground forces there, not as a part of the military conflict, nor as a part of the United Nations peacekeeping mission,” he reiterated.

Secretary of Defense William J. Perry, who met Saturday with North Atlantic Treaty Organization and European Union leaders in Paris, sought to drive home the point.

“We are not sending ground forces,” Perry told reporters en route to France on Friday night. “There has been much speculation in the press so let me be clear and unambiguous on that point. The United States is not sending ground forces.”

Republican leaders, not satisfied that the President apparently had stepped back from a precipice, faulted him Saturday for pursuing a “wavering” course on Bosnia and sowing confusion about U.S. policy.

“Regrettably, the President’s foreign policy has been one surprise after another,” said Rep. Benjamin A. Gilman of New York, who gave the Republican response to the radio address.

“The President’s statement about sending troops into this strife-torn country to help the U.N. restructure its forces has caught the American people by surprise. We in the Congress should know just where this new policy is going to lead, how many of our troops are going to be sent to Bosnia and for how long.”

The President has said repeatedly that he would consult with Congress before sending U.S. troops into action in Bosnia, but he also maintains that he is not legally required to obtain lawmakers’ approval.

Like his predecessors, Clinton contends that he can send U.S. troops into combat without a formal declaration of war by Congress.

“We will listen and take seriously their opinions. But the President is the commander in chief,” said a top White House adviser, speaking anonymously.

Clinton’s most recent troubles over his Bosnia policy began with the commencement speech he delivered Wednesday at the Air Force Academy in Colorado Springs.

Officials said Saturday that a staffer for National Security Adviser Anthony Lake revised the President’s speech on the flight to Colorado Springs and inserted the paragraphs that included the pledge to use U.S. forces on a “temporary” basis to help with the “reconfiguration” of U.N. forces.

“It was one sentence in a long speech,” a White House official said.

But the President and his advisers were clearly surprised by the strong, bipartisan reaction to his comment about coming to the aid of the embattled peacekeepers. Since then, officials have tried their best to downplay the U.S. commitment.

U.S. forces will intervene in “the remote, indeed highly unlikely event that Britain, France and other countries, with their considerable military strength and experience, become stranded and could not get out of a particular place in Bosnia,” Clinton said Saturday.

“The question has been raised about whether we would help them to withdraw as a last resort,” he said. “I have decided that, if a U.N. unit needs an emergency extraction, we would assist after consulting with Congress.”

Both Perry and Gen. John M. Shalikashvili, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, said the NATO plan for extracting troops is only a contingency to be used if everything goes wrong.

Times staff writer Doyle McManus contributed to this report.