From: simic@pollux.ccsf.caltech.edu (Petar Simic)
Subject: Bosnian Muslims Rsnian Muslim Govean Gn Government rejectrejects to negotiate
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 05:46:54 GMT

	According to the press reports (not on the first pages), the 
 London meeting between representatives of Croats, Serbs and Muslim 
 Government failed because Bosnian government persisted in rejecting any
 negotiation with the Serbian side. They call representatives of 1,4 milion
 Bosnian Serbs, "terrorists". It is not clear to me how to reconcile
 this rather arrogant attitude of the government, with the portrait painted
 by main-stream Western media of them as helpless victims of agression. It
 seems to me that if somebody is realy desparate and helpless and is concerned
 for the well-being of their own people, that he would jump on the opportunity
 to stop the violence and start talking, especially if the talks are mediated
 through international bodies, such as EZ or UN, as it is attempted in London.
 Is it possible that they reason that, ...if EZ & USA granted them
 independence without requiring political dialog with Bosnian Serbs, and
 without checking if they are able to control all of the granted territory, 
 then it is EZ & USA responsibility to militarily liberate them from the one
 third of their own citizens?    

	Also, yesterday on the McLerer news hour UN gen. McKenzie, who was in
 charge with the peace keeping mission in and arround Sarajevo, claimed
 (stressing that this is his personal opinion), that there can not be solution
 to the crisis before the representatives of the waring sides in Bosnia
 start direct talk/negotiation on the political settlement, and he added that
 one side (Bosnian government) consistently rejects to talk. He explained that
 he understands the reasons for their official position - if they start
 talking to Bosnian Serbs this would be acknowledgment that this is a
 civil war and not an outside agression - but he reiterated that from his
 experience and given the fact that situation defies simplestic explanation 
 and quick fixes, the only hope seems to be in a direct politic dialog between
 the sides inside Bosnia. "Outsiders" can help in making an environment for 
 talks and similar, but they can not bring lasting peace in the region.

	To me, one of the implications of these news is that those politicians 
 in the USA (like gov. Clinton, regretably) and elsevere who seem to think
 that the Bosnian civil war is a clear cut issue on which they can free-ride,
 and who seem to advocate taking sides and military intervention against one
 of the sides, are, in addition to demonstrating their ignorance and lack of
 responsibility, doing a great disservice to the prospects of the lasting
 peace on the Balkans. Their message warms the hopes of Muslim government of
 Bosnia that military intervention of the West on their behalf is just 
 arround the corner if they just persist in rejecting to talk to 
 representatives of Bosnian Serbs. It therefore contributes to prolongation 
 of the suffering of all the people of Bosnia and Hercegovina, yet, it seems
 that even after hypotethical military intervention of the West on the behalf
 of Muslim government, they would still have to talk to Bosnian Serbs if
 peacefull political settlement is to be ever achived in this part of 
 Yugoslavia. Such an action will be costly in terms of human and moral loss,
 and it does not seem likely to achive much beyond what can be achived on 
 the peace talks in which Bosnian Serbs would be pressured to size-down their
 territorial aspirations, but their rights to remain in Yugoslavia, as well 
 as the rights of Croats and Muslims, respectively, to do whatever they want
 with their fair-parts of Bosnia and Hercegovina, should not be denied. 

	Just an opinion. Regards,

	Petar Simic.