April 12, 1999

CRISIS IN KOSOVO: WILL 'DIPLOMACY'S VOICE' BECOME LOUDER?

The attention of commentators around the world remained riveted to events in Kosovo. Observers saw that today's meeting of NATO foreign ministers marks a "crucial" point in the crisis, with many wondering if "diplomacy's voice" will become louder. At the same time, opinionmakers everywhere increasingly focused on the role of Russia in the crisis. Recent statements by Russian President Boris Yeltsin--in which the Russian leader contended that as a result of NATO's action, there is a "danger of a European or even a third world war"--prompted widespread reaction in the press. Pundits disagreed on how seriously the Kremlin's bellicosity should be taken by the Alliance, but there was general consensus among analysts that Moscow should not be left on the "sidelines" of the formulation of any solution for Kosovo. Support for the NATO operation was persistently strongest in Western European capitals, and many commentators there continued their calls for NATO to prepare to send ground troops to Kosovo. These editorialists held that the Alliance must prevail against Yugolsav President Milosevic, asserting that it must do so on humanitarian and broader European security grounds. Critics--including those in Russia, China, India and some in the Arab/Muslim world--condemned NATO for its "illegal" attacks on a sovereign nation, seeing only U.S. hegemonic motives behind the bombing. Regional themes follow:

EUROPE: Many in the region focused sharply on Russia. Paris's left-of-center Le Monde judged Russian President Yeltsin's recent warnings to be "pathetic and worrisome," while a Madrid analyst held that Yeltsin's words should not be ignored as "mere demagogic ravings." Several European papers advised "involving Russia in the political game as soon as possible." Opinion differed in the Moscow press on a Russian proposal to form a Belarus-Russia-Yugoslavia alliance. Echoing the view of other reformist and centrist papers, reformist Izvestiya warned that such an alliance would draw Russia into the war, and "even as a political gesture, it will have catastrophic consequences." A Slovene paper fretted that the announced "brotherhood" seems to be a "symbolic act," but one that has "increased confusion and tension." While an official Russian daily agreed with others that "it is a bluff so far," it foresaw that it may be useful in "cooling the hotheads" in NATO. Meanwhile, papers in Warsaw focused on the future of NATO, noting that Poland's security can only be guaranteed by an Alliance that remains a "credible power able to effectively deter a possible aggressor."

MUSLIM/ARAB VIEW: Opinion appeared to be increasingly negative. Writers in Jerusalem, Doha, Damascus, Tunis and one paper in Dhaka all questioned the U.S.' intentions in Kosovo, with most implying that the superpower's true motives are "to establish a military base in the Balkans" and enforce its global "domination." Dhaka's conservative, Islamic Sangram, on the other hand, urged President Clinton to send in ground troops "immediately."

ELSEWHERE: China again criticized the "reckless" policy of the Allies, while observers in Australia and New Zealand focused on the possibility that only ground troops will ensure a clear NATO victory. An Indian paper said that a "Russian-brokered plan" and a UN-authorized military mission to "guarantee the return of refugees looks like the best hope for all sides."

NOTE: Owing to religious observances for Orthodox Easter, several posts did not file reports.

This survey is based on 57 reports from 33 countries, April 8-12.

EDITORS: Diana McCaffrey, Katherine Starr and Bill Richey

To Go Directly To Quotes By Region, Click Below

|  EUROPE  |     |  MIDDLE EAST  |    |  EAST ASIA AND THE PACIFIC  |    |   SOUTH ASIA  |    |  AFRICA  |

 |  WESTERN HEMISPHERE   |

FORMER YUGOSLAVIA

SLOVENIA: "Circle Of Violence Widening"

Left-of-center, independent Vecer commented (4/12): "Today's meeting by NATO foreign ministers proves that NATO has entered a dead-end street, for its bombs have not ended the ethnic cleansing in Kosovo. NATO is still trying to avoid deployment of ground forces...without which the bombing will have no effect and will be just another irrationality in the spiral of Balkan violence.... Milosevic still does not seem willing to yield to NATO's demands. ... The circle of violence is widening.... Russia is finding it hard to bridle its anger...and is talking about the danger of a European or even a third world war when ground forces' intervention in Kosovo is mentioned.... The (announced) union of Russia, Belarus, and Serbia has increased the confusion and tension. It seems to be a symbolic act supposed to strengthen the pan-Slavic Orthodox brotherhood and conceal weakness. But it is weakness which results in irrational acts."

EUROPE

BRITAIN: "Let The Real War Begin"

The conservative Daily Telegraph ran this lead editorial (4/12): "There is no evidence that unsupported air power can achieve what is being demanded of it.... Next week in Washington, NATO will celebrate its 50th anniversary. There will be room for self-congratulation on its past record. More important, though, is the immediate challenge to its authority, even to its future existence, presented by Milosevic. From Washington should come a clear definition of the Alliance's goal--an independent, unpartitioned Kosovo--and the requisite means to achieve it: a heightened air campaign and the rapid build-up of a ground invasion force. The phony war has lasted long enough."

"The Pace Quickens"

The conservative Times opined (4/12): "Some Western politicians have suggested that NATO should start preparing for a ground invasion if only to convince President Milosevic that the Alliance is ready to ratchet up the conflict to whatever force level is needed for victory.... The pace of war will instead be quickened in other ways. Intensified diplomacy must be linked to the destruction of Yugoslavia's military machine. That, Mrs. Albright will tell Russian Foreign Minister Ivanov, remains the aim. And the sooner Russia joins the diplomatic push, the sooner the air strikes will stop."

"More Bombs, Slow Results"

The liberal Guardian had this lead editorial (4/12): "Another week of war-making with progress apparently painfully slow. Why is NATO's air offensive taking so long to cripple the infrastructure? To account for only one-third of Serb/Yugoslav petroleum stores in three weeks isn't, on the face of it, impressive. Not even to stop the trams running in the streets of Belgrade does not inspire great confidence.... Those who thought this would be quick have now been disabused on the military front."

"Plane Sense"

The mass-circulation, conservative tabloid Sun had this lead editorial (4/12): "It's a week since we said we would not support a ground war in Kosovo. Seven days later it is clear that we were right. The air strikes are working, as we said they would. Bombers and missiles can achieve NATO's aim in relative safety."

FRANCE: "Dr. Strangelove In The Kremlin"

Left-of-center Le Monde remarked in its editorial (4/12): "Dr. Strangelove is sitting in the Kremlin.... The Russian president has once again raised the specter of a 'European war, maybe even a world war.'... There are domestic reasons which explain this Russian verbal escalation.... But Yeltsin's little speech is all at once pathetic and worrisome.... Russia's former greatness and its present possession of five thousand nuclear warheads explain Moscow's perpetual diplomatic courtship by Western leaders.... While it is wise not to leave Moscow on the sidelines, it could also be dangerous to take its leaders' declarations too seriously."

"Involving Russia In A New Marshall Plan"

Gilles Bridier argued in centrist La Tribune (4/12): "How about Russia? The conservative opposition is still strong and anti-Western feelings continue to run high. Although the Cold War is behind us, this does not mean Russia would easily accept a half military/half humanitarian presence in Kosovo, unless it was part of the initiative. Hence the need to involve Russia in the political game as soon as possible...in order to find an outcome to the crisis and to make Russia feel part of the deal."

"America Hardens Its Position"

Jean-Jacques Mevel asserted in right-of-center Le Figaro (4/12): "Far from the Rambouillet scenario, the U.S. goal today is to keep Kosovo from Yugoslavia's hold, whether Milosevic likes it or not.... This harsher U.S. position appears to be confirmed by Madeleine Albright's return on the scene.... Her meeting today with the Russian foreign affairs minister is probably dictated by renewed tension between Washington and Moscow. But Washington's 'Iron Lady' is sure not to give in to a Russian offer of compromise that would keep Milosevic afloat."

GERMANY: "A Road To Peace Through Moscow"

Left-of-center Frankfurter Rundschau noted (4/12): "It is high time to stop pinning one's hopes (for peace) on the effects of military strikes, but rather to do everything possible to find a political solution. Foreign Minister Fischer's plan to do so in the framework of the G-8 is a reasonable approach.... If the war is not to escalate and spin out of control, ground forces are imaginable in Kosovo only with Russian participation and only as peace-keeping forces. This means that the road to peace leads through Moscow."

"Involving Russia"

Werner Adam argued on the front page of right-of-center Frankfurter Allgemeine (4/12): "Attempts to get Moscow's support for constructive cooperation in settling the conflict in the Balkans should be continued. However, the German arguments that Western 'priorities' coincide with Russian priorities is, for the time being, no more than wishful thinking and not based on facts."

"Bringing Politics Back Into Play"

Business Handelsblatt of Duesseldorf noted (4/12): "The air strikes against Yugoslavia and Kosovo are entering their final phase. After the military stage, now the most important task now is bringing politics back into play. And in this connection we must again come back to the Security Council. A new security architecture can be created only among the old powers, including Russia."

"The Next, Logical Step"

Left-of-center Die Tageszeitung of Berlin front-paged this editorial by Ruediger Rossig (4/12): "Let us get used to the idea: Sooner or later, NATO soldiers and NATO tanks will be deployed in southern Serbia. They will encounter resistance and finally...they will win militarily. But then what? This question must be the starting point for all political considerations about the war in the Balkans.... Kosovo must become an international protectorate in which the nationalists on both sides will be politically unable to realize their goals until peace-loving political parties have organized themselves. Anything else would result in more fighting."

ITALY: "A Crucial Week"

A front-page commentary by Roberto Livi in Rome's centrist Il Messaggero held (4/12): "Up until now there has been no reaction from Belgrade concerning the UN secretary general's appeal and proposals.... International diplomacy resumed to vigorously weave its rug around the UN conditions so as to build a negotiated solution for the war in Kosovo. Tomorrow in Oslo, Clinton's 'Iron Lady,' Madeleine Albright and the Russian foreign minister will talk about these proposals.... Both Clinton and Yeltsin have expressed support for Kofi Annan's initiative. The U.S. president was convinced to do so after having seen that the three main European powers, Germany, France and Italy, had been pushing to make the UN enter the field.... The White House has also agreed to give a central role to Russia.... Indeed, this is a crucial week in order to avoid an escalation and a likely enlargement of the conflict between NATO and Yugoslavia.... If diplomacy's voice will not be able to cover the bombs' noise, the prospect of an enlargement of the conflict mounts...and the need to have NATO ground troops with it."

RUSSIA: "Will NATO Bomb BRY?"

In official government Rossiyskaya Gazeta (4/10) Aleksandr Sabov commented on prospects for the proposed Belarus-Russia-Yugoslavia alliance (BRY): "It is a bluff so far. It is off the cuff and needs to be mulled over, including from the standpoint of international law. But there is no lie in it, since it is based on tradition, with the three peoples naturally attracted to each other. How would NATO feel bombing a sovereign state, which is also part of a new European entity? Maybe that will cool the hotheads as they are trying to spread democracy and a new world order by dint of bombs."

"Russia Gets Into War"

Semyon Novoprudsky pointed out on page one of reformist Izvestiya (4/10): "If it is true what the (Duma) speaker said--and the way he said it, regrettably, makes it sound true--Russia is getting into the war. That is most unfortunate, with us drawing the fire. Even if it is a political gesture, it will have catastrophic consequences.... All right, let's get Yugoslavia aboard, even if we don't have a common border with it, and take on North Korea as well, and use Yugoslav dinars instead of U.S. dollars in our exchange offices."

"Belgrade Will Join Anyone to Hurt NATO"

Valery Yakov filed from Belgrade for reformist Noviye Izvestiya (4/10): "To beat or at least hurt NATO, Yugoslavia will join anyone. It wouldn't mind Zyuganov himself. The truth is that such a union, if it comes to pass, incredible as it is, will not live beyond NATO aggression. Assuming even that surrealistic scenario, it will be a union not with Belarus and Russia but with S-300s."

"Moscow-Belgrade Integration Apace"

Natalia Kalashnikova remarked on page one of reformist Segodnya (4/10): "Whatever the president said yesterday, Moscow-Belgrade integration is apace, meaning that Russia is being directly drawn into the war."

"Propaganda"

Dmitry Gornostayev said in centrist Nezavisimaya Gazeta (4/10): "A bluff helps sometimes. The main thing is to see that it does not become reality. The idea of Yugoslavia joining the Russia-Belarus union, important as it is, is largely propaganda. Under the circumstances, to follow it recklessly would be a mistake."

"Stupid, Senile Helmsmen"

Aleksandr Budberg wrote on page one of reformist, youth-oriented Moskovskiy Komsomolets (4/10): "It is as if our helmsmen, old and sick men, have got a second wind, ready to fight and risk their lives and that of their country and do crazy things. Those irresponsible, stupid and senile types, for no apparent reason, may drag Russia into a real and senseless war."

BELGIUM: "Probe The Terrain"

Paul De Bruyn maintained in conservative Catholic Gazet van Antwerpen (4/12): "The war is at a crucial stage. There is every indication that the bombings are beginning to hurt the Serbs. There are already rumors that Milosevic is willing to accept a peace settlement.... If Milosevic thinks that he can survive only by accepting a settlement over Kosovo, he will do that. For that reason, NATO must probe the terrain. It is advisable to involve Russia in that.... By involving the Russians more, NATO would eliminate much frustration in Moscow. Threats from the Kremlin indicate that there is growing frustration and irritation.... All means will be needed for the reconstruction of Kosovo and Yugoslavia--also Moscow's."

FINLAND: "Immensely Cruel Ethinic Cleansing

Leading, independent Helsingin Sanomat opined (4/10): "Increasingly, experts think that NATO's goals cannot be achieved without the deployment of ground forces. Earlier, public opinion in big NATO countries was opposed to that. There has been a change. The immensely cruel ethnic cleansing by Milosevic has made NATO leaders' position easier. Support for deploying ground troops for combat duties is on the increase in NATO countries."

"Kosovo Will Probably Have To Be Divided"

Independent Aamulehti opined (4/12): "Russia, with its increasingly harsh language, may take up the broker's role in earnest and put together a package which may not be as easy to reject. If NATO's objectives can be fulfilled, Russia should be given the due credit for peacemaking. But so far, Milosevic has not displayed any signs of a genuine will to make peace. It is difficult to imagine any other kind of solution for Kosovo besides dividing it, unless NATO simply recognizes defeat and leaves the Albanians to the refugee camps or under the tyranny of the Serbs."

THE NETHERLANDS: "NATO Course Deserves More Time"

Calvinist Trouw commented (4/10): "NATO has chosen a nuanced approach by hitting the Milosevic regime with carefully placed blows and to keep the way to the negotiating table open. This scrupulous course deserves more time".

"NATO Operation Must Succeed"

Centrist Algemeen Dagblad opined (4/12): "Milosevic has been causing distress in Yugoslavia since 1989. He had tens of thousands of people killed, chased out of their homes, and robbed. The world has passively watched all this for too long.... This NATO operation must succeed, even if it requires some sacrifices, and even if our patience is tested for weeks to come."

"Democracy's Paradox"

Independent Het Financieele Dagblad said (4/10): "Here is democracy's paradox: In the final analysis it cannot be defended democratically against undemocratic attacks. The Enlightenment philosophers already broke their heads over this. Reasonable and rational social human beings, they said, must avoid force. They must find non-violent solutions for their conflicts. But what do you do with people who do not accept the principle of non-violence?... Our democratic principles have to be put on hold for the duration. The nightmare scenario of a lengthy and very violent conflict would appear to become a reality."

POLAND: "The Highest Stake"

Jan Nowak-Jezioranski opined in centrist Rzeczpospolita (4/10-11): "Poland's security depends on maintaining NATO as a credible power able to effectively deter a possible aggressor. The present conflict is also for Poland a test of its value as an ally."

"Dispute Over NATO"

Tomasz Wroblewski observed in right-of-center Zycie (4/10-11): "After the air raids cease and the dust settles over Belgrade and Pristina, a new Balkan map is likely to emerge. This, however, will not be the only change in Europe. Within NATO itself, which is to redefine its strategy and objectives, we are now going to see far more serious transformations--both military and political ones.... The peril we face is that of NATO becoming a large political-bureaucratic machine where there are a few countries determined to conduct military actions outside the territory of the pact in defense of broadly understood members' interests and moral values...and then those whose support is restricted to sheer diplomatic declarations.... NATO will not break apart. It may, however, transform itself from an institution which is crucial to the future of the world into one that is as sluggish and inefficient as the United Nations--a timid organization susceptible to the moods prevalent in the member countries 'parliamentary factions.'"

"Disorder Is A Greater Peril Than Missiles"

Leopold Unger wrote in liberal Gazeta Wyborcza (4/10-11): "On his way to the hospital, Yeltsin managed to threaten the West with a European or 'even a world war.'... These are just threats though, because Russia does not have either enough will or the means to launch an overt...military intervention in the Balkans.... The world should not fear Russia's missiles. What the world should be afraid of is the disorder in the higher echelons of the Russian state."

PORTUGAL: "Rationalizing Dictators"

Henrique Monteiro commented in lead-circulation, leftist weekly Expresso (4/10): "The images of Serb barbarity against the Kosovars are gradually, little by little, provoking a change in world public opinion. In Portugal, nevertheless, some politicians and intellectuals persist in not thinking rationally about this naked and crude reality, but instead, on the basis of their own preconceptions, they are elaborating rationalization on top of rationalization, which only leads them to conclusions that are in many cases false or flawed....

"They do not perceive that the Cold War produced winners and losers and that democratic and liberal regimes were among the winners. And that it was the force of freedom that allowed them to confront Hitler, at a time when Moscow was still allied to the Nazis, and that permits them to confront Milosevic today. "

"NATO Bombs Killing Democracy"

Alfredo Barroso held in lead-circulation leftist weekly Expresso (4/10): "The irresponsible insensitivity and subservience with which Europe's social-democratic governments have blindly fallen in behind the power of U.S. imperial and arrogant leadership is, in fact, perfectly scandalous.... NATO bombs are also killing democracy."

SPAIN: "Russia's Role"

Liberal El Pais commented (4/11): "The world was alarmed last Friday as it has not been since the end of the Cold War after Russian President Yeltsin warned NATO of the risk of a European or even a 'world' war brought about by the bombing of Serbia, adding he would not tolerate a ground invasion of Yugoslavia.... It would be a mistake to ignore Yeltsin's warnings as mere demagogic ravings. Russia continues to be the world's second nuclear power, nor should its present state of prostration be exacerbated by further humiliations.... The outbreak of war means that diplomacy has failed, something that all the players in the Balkan tragedy should attempt to rectify.... The best way for Moscow to recover its leadership in this matter is to use its influence to convince Milosevic to accept the five-point formula recently announced by the UN secretary general."

TURKEY: "NATO's Dilemma"

Sukru Elekdag commented in mass-appeal Milliyet (4/12): "From the very beginning, NATO miscalculated by believing an air strike operation without any ground forces would be enough to gain results in Kosovo. As we have all witnessed, this mistake has cost the lives of Kosovar Albanians and has also created a huge refugee crisis.... It is wrong and untimely for President Clinton to keep saying there will not be a ground operation. These types of statements do nothing but encourage Milosevic to continue his defiance. NATO should immediately formulate a new strategy based on realistic political, as well as military, goals."

MIDDLE EAST

ISRAEL: "Where Is Victory?"

Mass-appeal, pluralist Maariv opined (4/12): "As the Kosovo operation drags on, the suspicion is growing that NATO has no credible military plan and President Clinton and his Allies lack the determination and readiness to take the losses needed to win the confrontation.... It appears that most of the world and most of the Israelis basically support the NATO operation--that is if the Americans and their Allies come out the winners and force Milosevic to let the refugees return to their homes.... If, however, NATO fails, so would the message Clinton is seeking to get across to the world.... Failure in Kosovo could have far reaching global strategic consequences."

WEST BANK: "Only In The Interest Of The U.S."

Ashraf Al-Ajrami commented in independent, pro-Palestinian Authority Al-Ayyam (4/12): "The use of military power in Yugoslavia is good only for the United States.... In all cases, Washington uses destruction to weaken its enemies, enforce its domination, and threaten other countries."

EGYPT: "Yeltsin Could Be Pushed"

Columnist Abbass El Tarabilly argued in liberal, oppositon Wafd (4/10): "Yeltsin, who is seeking to play a role to emphasize his existence and to show that he is not Russia's sick man and that his country is not the sick man of Europe, could be pushed to take a decision that the world fears. A decision which could not only lead to a European war but could spark a third world war, whose dimensions or consequences are unknown."

JORDAN: "NATO's Miscalculations"

Columnist Taher Udwan judged in pro-government, influential Al-Ray (4/12): "The tragic developments in the case of the Kosovo refugees show that NATO's calculations were completely off the mark. The objective of the war was to put an end to ethnic cleansing in Yugoslavia. Yet the war has so far entrenched and facilitated the ethnic cleansing."

QATAR: "What To Think If NATO Is Not Prepared To Send In Groud Troops"

Semi-independent Al-Watan held (4/11): "After the massacres and the brutality, Kosovo should not be expected to remain within the Yugoslav Federation. And it is clear that the main strategic objective will not be served without sending ground troops to face the Serbian army.... If NATO is not prepared to adopt this option, as is apparently the case, NATO's intentions toward the people of Kosovo are under suspicion."

SYRIA: "Angry Russia"

Nadia Dumyatti commented in government-owned Al-Thawra (4/11): "Yeltsin's behavior and Russia's anger have sounded the alarm in Washington and Western capitals about a potential development that might not be controlled in a struggle that is worsening in the light of expanded U.S. hegemony and monopoly in the world."

TUNISIA: "First And Last...It Is A War Of Interests"

Abdelhamid Riahi wrote in Ash-Shourouq (4/11): "Is America's involvement in the war inspired by humanitarian concern for the Kosovo Albanians or does it have a hidden agenda? To answer this question, lets just say that it would be naive to believe that America is acting for the sake of the Muslim Kosovars. No one would believe such an explanation.... No one really thinks that this is a religious war.... We have learned that America does not act unless it works in its interest. If this were not true, it would have deployed its army to stop Israel's suppression of the Palestinian people.... America may be looking to establish a military base in the Balkans...or it may hope to bring Western Europe to its side and to break the tooth of the Russian bear."

EAST ASIA AND PACPFIC

CHINA: "Warning Of Crisis"

Wang Yizhou said in official Communist party People's Daily (Renmin Ribao, 4/12): "If the Balkan barrier is overcome, the United States and its Allies will become even more reckless. There is good indication that the United States, the self-proclaimed democracy and peace advocate, has repeatedly taken the lead in sparking international arms races. Behind NATO's high-sounding excuses, hide the crucial geo-strategic interests."

"NATO Sheds Crocodile Tears For Refugees"

Bian Zhuodan insisted said in official, Chinese Youth Party China Youth Daily (Zhongguo Qingnianbao, 4/12): "In another stunning development, NATO played the 'refugee card' after creating the disastrous refugee trouble.... The United States' real motive is not to escort refugees home, but to send troops into Kosovo...[and] enlarge NATO's sphere of influence by deploying troops to Kosovo."

AUSTRALIA: "Clinton Must Come Down To Earth"

The national, conservative Weekend Australian (4/10) had this op-ed comment from Bob Hall of the Australian Defense Studies Center: "If NATO is to stop or reverse 'ethnic cleansing' at some stage it must launch a ground assault. But it may already be too late. Milosevic is close to completing his operations in Kosovo, rendering NATO's aim of dissuading him obsolete. If it were to proceed, a NATO ground offensive would need a new aim--perhaps to expel the Serbian army from Kosovo and repatriate the refugees. This is precisely the long-term, dangerous quagmire NATO would want to avoid.... If a ground offensive is not launched, the air campaign will end when either Clinton or Milosevic loses the will to continue. It is more likely that Clinton will blink before Milosevic."

NEW ZEALAND: "Price Of Peace May Be War On Ground"

The largest-circulation, liberal Sunday Star-Times said (4/11): "Those who call for `negotiations' instead of war misunderstand their man. For years, Milosevic suckered a succession of Western negotiators while Bosnia burned. He filibustered at the Rambouillet peace talks while preparing a genocidal war.... The West justifiably wants to avoid repeating that mistake. The price might be a ground war in Kosovo."

PHILIPPINES: "Russia Is Bluffing"

Publisher Teodoro Locsin, Jr. maintained in liberal Today (4/12): "The Russian president is bluffing, of course; if Russia has anything to do with it, there will be no World War III or any kind of confrontation over the Balkans. The history of Serbia shows a consistent betrayal by the Russians of their fellow Slavs in the south.... Since Western diplomats read history, they know this, and so the bombing of Serbia will continue, in the same spirit of contempt in which that land has in the past been repeatedly hurt."

"Treading The Poisonous Ground Of WWI"

Columnist Nelson Navarro opined in the independent Manila Standard (4/12): "Bill Clinton's folly was to believe that Milosevic could be frightened into submission and that all it would take was several days of bombardment.... America and its Allies are trudging on the same poisoned ground that brought forth World War I. The world is still in some luck because, unlike 1914, the Serbs have no great power to turn to except themselves. But they're no pushovers, and could yet drag Russia and other Western enemies into the abyss."

SOUTH KOREA: "Balkans Conflict Leading To World War?"

Independent Dong-A Ilbo's editorial stressed (4/12): "Many believe [Yeltsin's] remarks were made in large part to serve Russia's political purposes at home. While that assessment may well be true, the remarks nevertheless have a message for us: The global order will be at risk if the Kosovo situation further aggravates relations between the United States, Russia and China.... The Balkans situation must not be expanded further, and international organizations, including the UN, should do their part to find a road to recover peace."

THAILAND: "U.S. Reluctance To Send In Ground Forces"

The lead editorial in the top-circulation, moderately conservative Bangkok Post insisted (4/10): "The bombing of a sovereign country, without the approval of the UN, was and continues to be, an unacceptable course of action. NATO is standing firm--for the moment--that it will not order ground troops into Yugoslavia. This is seen by some as the only way the dispute will be resolved. But the United States is certainly reluctant to go down that track, and understandably so, given its past unsuccessful experience of placing ground troops in other war-torn countries, including Vietnam."

SOUTH ASIA

INDIA: "Time UN Acted"

In the editorial view of the centrist Hindu (4/10): "Innocent civilians are paying for the gross miscalculation of the Western military Alliance as the war being waged in the Balkans with the ostensible purpose of saving them goes into a second fortnight.... There is talk of committing troops to the region, dangerously escalating the war.... It is not the business of NATO to interfere in the internal affairs of Yugoslavia, however offensively it treats its citizens. By taking the Washington-inspired hardline, the Alliance has bombed itself into a dilemma. As it convenes to celebrate its 50th anniversary, it will suffer a devastating blow to its prestige if, after attacking a sovereign state for the first time in its existence, it fails in it main objective of protecting the civilians in Kosovo.... The best insurance for independent nations against global gendarmes is the UN.... By repeatedly bypassing the organization and rendering it ineffectual, the Western nations are undermining the only hope that remains of a just world order."

"Russia Growls"

An editorial in the right-of-center Indian Express pointed out (4/12): "NATO believes its credibility--and its future effectiveness--will be at stake unless it is seen to 'prevail' in Kosovo.... However, the fact that President Clinton, if not the Europeans, remains reluctant to send in ground troops means that NATO is looking for an honorable way out.... A Russian-brokered plan, and, if necessary, a military mission under the authority of the Security Council to guarantee the return of refugees looks like the best hope for all sides."

BANGLADESH: "Kosovo And Russia's Attitude"

Conservative, Islamic Bangla-language Sangram's editorial told its readers (4/12): "In light of the [continued suffering of the Kosovo Albanians,] President Clinton should consider sending in ground troops immediately. It will not be possible to bring Milosevic under control without ground troops. If Milosevic is restrained, Yeltsin will also remain in check."

NEPAL: "Stop The War"

The Independent Kathmandu Post contended (4/12): "Kosovo may have been burning before NATO action, but air strikes have only stoked that fire.... NATO alone is responsible for the destruction of Belgrade and the rising civilian deaths due to bombs. A 'humanitarian catastrophe' never witnessed in Europe since World War II has taken place in Yugoslavia and NATO shares the responsibility along with the Serbs.... NATO must stop the bombing and Milosevic must stop playing his games. In this regard, NATO's demand that refugees be allowed to return with an international force to ensure their safety is not unreasonable. The other details regarding the future of Kosovo can then be negotiated peacefully. But first, the bombing and the violence in Kosovo must stop."

"NATO's Naked Aggression"

Independent Aajako Samacharpatra judged (4/11): "Continued NATO pressure...to grant independence to Kosovo is a naked aggression on a sovereign nation."

SRI LANKA: "NATO Attacks Provoke Humanitarian Disaster"

Stanley Kalpage told readers of the pro-opposition, English-language Sunday Island (4/11): "[NATO] convinced itself that the only language that Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic understands is overwhelming force. But...NATO's strategy [is] insufficient without ground troops. But the debate on whether ground troops should be used is proceeding.... Even if Milosevic ultimately agrees to these conditions, the status quo ante in Kosovo will be difficult to re-establish."

AFRICA

NIGERIA: "Halt The Air Raids, NATO"

Lagos-based, independent This Day ran this commentary (4/11): "NATO should spare Europe and the world another war by halting the air campaign which is fast destroying infrastructure and population in Yugoslavia. It should not continue to ignore the capability of Russia, which historically has been allied to the Serbs, as Moscow could be forced out of its lethargy. Bill Clinton should exploit the latter's influence to get Belgrade to seek a political settlement."

WESTERN HEMISPHERE

CANADA: "China's Self-Protection"

Guy Taillefer commented in liberal French-language Le Devoir (4/10-11): "(NATO) air raids (against Yugoslavia) which may get out of control will not spare China, Belgrade's traditional ally.... In declaring itself for the respect of the 'sovreignty' of the Yugoslav state and against NATO intervention in an 'internal' affair, China is protecting its absolute right on the questions of Tibet and Taiwan."

BRAZIL: "The Great Losers"

Liberal Folha de S. Paulo had this editorial (4/12): "The American policy in relation to Yugoslavia was based on the principle that Milosevic's intransigence was nothing but bluster, and that the threat of bombardments would be enough to make him negotiate in an extreme situation. The calculation was mistaken because it didn't take into consideration the nature of the Serbian government, composed of a band of racists not at all willing to compromise.... The military action served...for Milosevic to free himself of the remaining controls and to undertake...the ethnic cleansing operation in Kosovo.... The government looks like the winner; the great losers are the civilian populations."

TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO: "Kosovo's Future"

The independent, mass-circulation Trinidad Guardian (4/8) carried this op piece: "The crisis in Europe now has two new aspects: NATO's war against Yugoslavia, which is carrying out a brutal campaign of 'ethnic cleansing' against the Albanians of Kosovo; and the flood of refugees who are pouring out of that beleaguered province.... Europe is mustering its resources of financial and humanitarian aid to deal with the immediate crisis but no one can offer a long-term solution to the plight of the outcasts.... Even if Milosevic bows to the increasing pressure of NATO's air strikes, it is hard to see how the Kosovars could agree to remain part of Yugoslavia under any circumstances."

For more information, please contact:

U.S. Information Agency

Office of Public Liaison

Telephone: (202) 619-4355

4/13/99

# # #