So, do recent events vindicate Clinton’s policy on Yugoslavia?
I understand (from the paper this morning) that the new president, despite anti-American rhetoric during the campaign, is now opening back-door channels to the U.S. in an effort to improve relations.
Granted, there is still a lot of ethnic hatred in the Balkans, but could the situation really have been handled any better than Clinton has handled it? The prime troublemaker (Milosevic) is now a fugitive, the Serbs pulled back, and we didn’t lose any soldiers.
Any Clinton-bashers out there who are now ready to give Bill his due on this one?
From someone who hasn’t bashed Clinton, this story has not yet ended.
Does Kostunica support the Dayton Peace Accords? No
Does he support an independent Kosovo? No
Will he turn Milosevic over to the War Crimes Tribunal? No
We need to give this a couple months to see what shakes out.
Actually (if I understood the news reports correctly) Milosevic has been given a choice by the new government: Turn yourself in for trial in Yugoslavia on various charges, including election fraud and corruption charges, or be turned over to the War Crimes Tribunal for trial as a war criminal. Either way, Milosevic is looking at prison.
As far as Kostunica is concerned, it appears to me that he may have spouted off some anti-American rhetoric to get elected (hardly surprising) but that he is now seeking to begin a process of healing.
Sure, things can go wrong, but the turn of events has to make you optimistic.
As I understand the matter, Kostunica’s positions on these matters are basically the same as Milosevic’s – save that he’s popular with the Serbs, and he’s “democratically elected”.
Given the attitudes of the average Westerners towards these attributes, I predict that the next move in this little drama will be a apparently grassroots demand here in the States to drop all sanctions against Yougslavia, on the grounds that nothing, nothing, is worth making the children suffer for.