Bildt Got What He Asked for From Karadzic but Not What He Expected

Carl Bildt learned a painful lesson over the weekend: Be careful what you ask for. You may get it.

The Swedish diplomat, who is in charge of civilian aspects of the Bosnian peace accord, twisted arms for months to get Radovan Karadzic to relinquish his powers as the Bosnian Serbs’ president.

After a lot of tough words and threats of a Monday ultimatum, Bildt got his wish: Karadzic signed a document, prepared by Bildt’s office, formally transferring his duties to a trusted deputy. The wording of the document was of Bildt’s choosing, and its disclosure was touted as a significant step toward permanently sidelining Karadzic.

But on Monday, just a day after the hard-won announcement, Bildt’s top aides in Sarajevo were accusing Karadzic of deception, manipulation and connivance.

Michael Steiner, Bildt’s chief deputy, called on the United States and other Western countries to consider punitive actions against the Bosnian Serbs. In Washington, State Department spokesman Nicholas Burns refused to set a deadline for the imposition of sanctions if Karadzic does not resign but said that option is under active consideration.

*

What happened? Embarrassingly, Karadzic--notorious for wiggling out of international commitments--lived up to the letter of the agreement, which was so limited in scope that the indicted war crimes suspect can still call himself president and not be in violation.

The document mentions nothing about Karadzic giving up his post as head of the Serbian Democratic Party, nor does it pledge cooperation with the international war crimes tribunal in The Hague, which has twice indicted him on charges of genocide.

Karadzic appeared on the main Bosnian Serb television news Monday night for nearly 10 minutes, pledging in a speech to party faithful that Bosnian Serbs “shall never again fit in any kind of federation” and declaring that the international community considers all Serbs, not just Karadzic himself, as enemies.

None of it violated his agreement with Bildt.

“There was a perception that this [agreement] would be a good thing, but it was not seen that, with it . . . Karadzic could still trick around,” one Western official said in Sarajevo, the Bosnian capital. “Obviously it was a misperception.”

A Western diplomat said of Bildt’s latest diplomacy: “Our ambassador is generally willing to bend over backward to try to get answers and see the good side of things, but I can frankly tell you that we see very little good in this.”

Referring to the document Karadzic signed, the State Department’s Burns said, “This outcome is not going to convince anybody that Karadzic has taken the steps that everyone in the international community is now demanding.”

And a senior Clinton administration official said there was no point in focusing on the document or anything else Karadzic or his aides have said, because there is an almost complete disconnection between what they say and what they do.

He said the United States will not be satisfied until Karadzic disappears from public view.

U.N. spokesman Colum Murphy said Bildt chose to limit the document’s breadth because he has learned it is best to negotiate incrementally with Karadzic, who has made a mini-career of outmaneuvering and outsmarting Western interlocutors. Sources said it was also a compromise, because it was clear Karadzic’s outright resignation would be fiercely resisted by his supporters.

But in a jam to explain how things could turn so bad so quickly, Murphy heaped blame on a new culprit--Biljana Plavsic, the ultranationalist Bosnian Serb vice president selected by Karadzic to assume his duties.

The Bildt agreement was proceeding just fine, Murphy said, until Plavsic decided to speak out Sunday. Plavsic told reporters that Karadzic had not resigned as president and that the transfer of authority was, according to the Bosnian Serb constitution, only temporary.

Both statements were true and did not contradict the agreement, but they were not what Bildt’s office expected--or wanted--the world to hear.

“As somebody once said, I think Churchill, Mrs. Plavsic wasted a marvelous opportunity to remain silent,” Murphy said. Instead, she “decided to confuse the issue and muddy the waters.”

But Bosnian Serb officials say they are the ones who are confused. Facing a threat of renewed economic sanctions and intense pressure, Karadzic agreed to Bildt’s demands. Plavsic then spoke the truth. Why all the fuss?

“We don’t understand,” a Bosnian Serb official said. “Bildt wrote the statement, and Karadzic signed it. Isn’t that what they wanted?”

That Bildt asked for, and got, too little is no longer in dispute. Karadzic got the better of him this time, most analysts say. But Karadzic and the Bosnian Serbs know the Dayton, Ohio, peace accord requires his removal from public office and an eventual day of reckoning at the war crimes tribunal in The Hague.

*

The question now, one high-ranking Western official in Sarajevo said, is how long the West will allow Karadzic to keep winning.

“It is all a game for [the Bosnian Serbs],” the official said. “They give a little bit, they try it out, and they give something else. The issue isn’t, ‘Is he in power or not?’ but, ‘Will he be delivered finally to The Hague?’ ”

The latest blunder, the official said, may inadvertently help those eager to come down harder on Karadzic by building a consensus in London, Washington, Bonn and Paris for a tougher policy.

Until now, defenders say, Bildt has been handicapped by a divided international community exhausted by Bosnia-Herzegovina and its many problems, but perhaps the latest embarrassment, they say, will close the ranks.

Times staff writer Norman Kempster in Washington contributed to this report.