U.S. Support of New Bosnia Force Wanes : Politics: Clinton links participation in U.N. mission to backing of Congress. Cost is an issue.

President Clinton raised the possibility Wednesday that the United States may not provide the support that it has promised to the new British-French rapid-reaction force in Bosnia-Herzegovina if Congress continues to oppose the idea.

In a news conference after meeting with new French President Jacques Chirac, Clinton said that U.S. participation in the multinational effort “depends upon whether the Congress is willing” to go along with the move.

Pointedly, he did not vow to fight hard to win Congress’ support.

The President’s unexpectedly lukewarm stance appeared to dismay some French officials, who had hoped that the session with Clinton would merely ratify the United States’ pledge of two weeks ago to provide close-air support, logistics and equipment for the European force.

But some analysts suggested that Clinton may be trying to pressure the French into redrafting a proposed resolution, pending in the U.N. Security Council, that would require Washington to pay substantially more than it had expected to finance the operation.

The resolution, taken up initially by the Security Council on Tuesday, was shelved by the United States after several leading Republican lawmakers openly challenged the formula for computing each country’s share of the costs.

The rapid-reaction force--made up of 10,000 combat troops from France, Britain and the Netherlands--was designed to take military action to help protect U.N. peacekeepers in cases where they are threatened, captured or taken hostage.

When the allies met two weeks ago to discuss creating the rapid-reaction force, the understanding was that each country would pay only for its own contribution. In the case of the United States, that means logistics, intelligence, equipment and close-air support.

But the resolution drafted by the Security Council treats the rapid-reaction force as an expansion of U.N. peacekeeping forces in Bosnia, requiring the United States to pay 31% of the entire cost of the operation--its standard share for traditional peacekeeping ventures.

U.S. officials say the issue is far from settled.

Defense Department Comptroller John J. Hamre told lawmakers Wednesday that the Pentagon still has not received enough specifics on equipment and requirements to be able to compute the cost of the new force.

If Clinton’s remarks Wednesday do prod the French to return to the original financing plan, the White House believes that it could get through Congress.

The French “understand the policy realities of Washington,” one official said privately.

Administration officials said they plan to meet with members of Congress in the next few days in hopes of resuming action in the Security Council next week.

The developments came as Congress stepped up its involvement in the Administration’s new Bosnia policy on Wednesday, with Senate and House committees holding hearings on the issue and top Republicans moving to challenge the President.

In a round of fresh congressional measures, three House committee chairmen caused a delay in Security Council action on a resolution authorizing the rapid-reaction force in Bosnia, saying they were not told in advance about the cost to the United States.

At the same time, Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole (R-Kan.) prepared to introduce resolutions that would limit Clinton’s authority to use U.S. ground forces in Bosnia to help in a withdrawal of U.N. troops and would lift the embargo on providing arms to the Muslim-led Bosnian government.

Members of the House Appropriations defense subcommittee also grilled Defense Secretary William J. Perry and Gen. John M. Shalikashvili, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, on the situation in Bosnia, demanding that Congress be kept better informed about developments.

In the Senate, former President Jimmy Carter told the Senate Armed Services Committee that he believes it is possible to work out a mediated settlement of the Bosnian conflict, and he declared that “it’s time to reassert” a diplomatic push for a peace accord.

As is often the case in such instances, the action in Congress was largely uncoordinated and, so far, has resulted in little more than rhetoric. Moreover, the lawmakers themselves appear split, with many conceding that Clinton has no good options available.

Nevertheless, congressional strategists said momentum in both houses appears to be accelerating and is being taken seriously by the Administration, which delayed the vote in the Security Council on its own initiative to provide time to consult with lawmakers.

Separately, Perry told lawmakers that an initial investigation shows that the shoot-down of a U.S. Air Force F-16 over Bosnia last month did not stem from poor intelligence-gathering. But he acknowledged that the information could have been sent to the pilot more quickly.

Times staff writer Stanley Meisler at the United Nations contributed to this report.