European Stars and Stripes (Newspaper) - June 1, 1994, Darmstadt, Hesse Wednesday Junel 199 i commentary 3 the stabs and stripes Page 15u.n. Needs combat Force for real world woes Stephen s. Rosenfeld a Day Landing boats dramatic action a known and evil foe full Power Victory. Nothing has changed More in 50 years than the Way in which we routinely tend to the global stability that was bought by massive commitment and sacrifice in world War ii the . Peacekeeping operations now scattered around the world Are everything a Day was not marginal ambivalent ragged controversial. But How could it be otherwise and who would again want total War we must Deal with the world we live in and we live in a world where Flea Dekeep a ing in its various forms is unavoidable and import a a _ Tant to us. We have not done it Well enough and As a result we face a certain crisis of internationalism. Bill Clinton is blamed for wobbling Boutros Boutros Ghali for overreaching. But such criticisms miss the main Point. The real trouble is that in this time of relative safety and Security for the favored nations peacekeeping can mean an in Welchie degree of personal risk to the forces taking part and political risk to their sponsoring governments. Americans have spent the past few years wrestling with this dilemma. The Post cold War Vista opened with the Rosy and mistaken diagnosis that so vict american confrontation alone had kept the United nations from ushering in a new world order. In the second More sober stage we arc seeing that the United nations is not merely an irregular contributor to global stability but sometimes itself a contributor to disorder. The primary contributors to disorder Are the governments and their challengers. But the deeds done by peacekeepers sometimes have the unintended but perverse effect of enabling the parties to extend War and avoid peace. To use the United nations As an instrument of Relief for example sounds Noble. But it can also encourage combatants to shift some part of their War budget to others and can spare them the discipline of an Early reckoning. Are we ready to use Relief explicitly As a political lever the new pattern of ethnic wars makes this disturbing question inc reas singly difficult to evade. The International presence in Bosnia is being used by the serbs in an Effort to freeze their gains and by the muslims to reverse their losses. This is understandable they Are at War. But peacekeepers lend Only themselves to the belligerents Maneu vers when they make their own safety their first concern. In Bosnia the United nations now routinely softens natos ultimatums to Avert expected serbian retaliation against exposed , forces. This makes the world body a partner in diluting its own credibility and effectiveness. It gets worse when such limited self defense As peacekeepers do conduct is treated As a loss of neutrality. But americans Are poorly placed to complain As Long As american forces do not share the risks on the ground. The embarrassment in Rwanda is scarcely less painful. The United nations first response was to pull peacekeepers out abandoning the helpless civilians it was ostensibly there to protect. Some . Forces remain but with both the Hutu army and Tutsi rebels threatening to fire upon them if they get in the Way they May not be there for Long. Its not the United nations fault. A membership organization it must heed members unwilling to take More than Token casualties. But in that Case the talking part of the United nations should Stop issuing resolutions instructions and promises premised on the notion that the peacekeeping Force is a military juggernaut. The desultory discussion of tactics must get serious. Ground forces might be reduced and air Power brought to Bear against the violators of . Decrees. Or forces might be increased and unleashed. Manv people have already con eluded that International peacekeeping involving the use of Force is a passing phase in global politics a Post cold War Experiment that did not work out. But its Early to throw in the Towel. I think there is still a logic in proposals for a standby , combat Force that members had endowed with a Mission and with suitable resources. Nut that the members a Sovereign states after All a later take Back their approval. But at least there would be an Effort to Deal with the real world of hard choices rather than a pretend world in w hich every body acts As though peace comes for free in any event let us not slip too casually and uncritically into d Day Celebration of a War that after a involved a global cataclysm and caused More than a Quarter million american combat deaths. It was horrible. We should be glad that our Security and stability cares though they use up our whole frazzle quotient arc trivial compared with the challenges that America and its allies faced and mastered in world War ii. C Washington Post a nominee a in to min i am writing. In the Hope that my telling this one Story will help you to understand More dearly How so Many Fine people have it come to find themselves. Loathing the military a Bill Clinton wrote in his infamous do Combe 1969 letter to the director of the University of Arkansas Roth program a to Many of us it is no longer Clear what is service and what is disservice.�?�. Since his election president Clinton has made a major Effort to disassociate himself with those self serving remarks. As he is now discovering at every turn the decision to use military Force abroad be it in Vietnam or Bosnia or Haiti is made by the nations political leadership not by its military. U he and the a Many Fine people who opposed the Vietnam War should loathe anyone it should be the likes of his Mentor Arkansas sen. J. A William Fulbright who successfully floor managed the 1964 Gulf of Tonkin Resolution to Senate approval thus formally involving the . In combat in Vietnam. But obviously Clinton still has Dittli Cully in understanding Quot what is service and what is proof is his nomination of one of his fellow Quot leathers Vietnam War activist Sam Brown to be the . Ambassador to the conference on Security and cooperation in Europe based in Vienna Austria. In so doing Clinton is following the example set by president Jimmy Carter who nominated Brown to head action the Agency he designed to coordinate civilian Volunteer service. At Browne a swearing in ceremony in March 1977, Carter made one of the most obscene speeches Ever Given at the White House. He compared Browne a Vietnam a a services with that of Max Cle land who was also being sworn in As head of the veterans administration. Carter said a Sam Brown was. One of the leaders of a group of people who expressed in forceful terms the j r disapproval of the War. And they engaged in a form of civil combat on the streets of Chicago and they showed a great Deal of courage in their own a. Carter did not elaborate on what that a great Deal of courage might be. Aside from the occasional paper Cut from handing out leaflets and being caught in the rain from time to time Browne a greatest risk would appear to be his risking the adulation of most of the news Media and the fawning of the president of the United states. These remarks could be dismissed As run of the Mill had not Carter in the same voice equated Brown to fellow appointee Cleland. Describing Cleland As a a Young Man who went to Vietnam As a Volunteer a Carter noted that a the had already completed Iris masters degree work in College. He did no to have to go but he Felt that he should serve his country. A and he went to Vietnam. And in the combat zone he got out of a helicopter one afternoon and seeing a grenade lying nearby threw himself upon it and lost his Arm and both his legs and came Hack severely 1 for a Southern politician it was like comparing Confederate Gen. Stonewall Jackson who risked it All on the Battlefield to War profiteer and Carpetbagger Rhett Butler. And now another Southern politician Bill Clinton has nominated a Scalas Vag to be the ambassador to the Csc a Post for which he is singularly unqualified. What does this nominee Quot Tell us about Harry g. Summers the presidents own views a asked Republican sen. Fhil Grameni of Texas. It. Would seem to Tell us thai the views expressed by Bill Clinton in 19 19, when he was attempting to explain away his refusal 1o serve his country Are still alive and Well. Why otherwise Given the wide Pool of candidates with some knowledge of military affairs would he nominate an activist who made his reputation loathing military affairs Carters appointment of Sam Brown to head action was disgraceful enough but Clinton a naming him to head the . Delegation to Csc is worse. Clinton a desire to Reward what obviously was his boyhood idol is understandable but the unsettled conditions in Europe today and the potential threats to . Well being those conditions0 might generate demand that the head of the . Delegation at least have a rudimentary understanding of what Security is All about. The Senate of the United states has a moral duty to distinguish Between service and disservice. It should not dignify with its approval the nomination of one whose reputation was built on his loathing of those very americans who served their country when they were called cd los any Les tinc3
