Commentary / PERSPECTIVE ON INTERVENTION :...

The moral blame for our failure to act decisively in Yugoslavia does not lie in any great moral insensitivity on our part, but rather in our inability to find the practical means to realize moral ends. There is no sense in talking about moral actions unless one can show that “doing something” will have some promise of effectiveness, and will not lead to graver consequences than inaction.

From the beginning of the crisis, our policy has been undercut by the fact that we have sought maximal aims--restoration of full Bosnian sovereignty--while having virtually no leverage with which to achieve this goal. To act effectively, and therefore morally, I believe we have to pare back our goals to something achievable: in my view, settling for partition of Bosnia to create defensible sanctuary zones in which Muslim refugees can be fed and sheltered this winter. At the same time, we need leverage against the Serbs, which means not bombing them, but lifting the current arms embargo so that the Bosnian Muslims can defend themselves. It may seem strange to advocate provision of weapons as a means of achieving moral ends, but we have been telling the Muslims, in effect, that they don’t have the right to defend themselves.

This, I believe, is the only effective marriage of moral ends and realistic means.