FROM LA TIMES SYNDICATE. AVAILABLE BY SPECIAL ARRANGEMENT ONLY.

FOR RETRANSMISSION, PLEASE CONTACT JOYCE AUSTIN IN LOS ANGELES

TEL: 213-237-7901 OR FAX: 213-237-4616

kissinger

CAUTION: This material is strictly embargoed. Its use is authorized
only by subscribers of the HENRY KISSINGER column. With the exception of
these paid subscribers, its contents must not under any circumstance be
quoted, excerpted, summarized, paraphrased or in any way published, in
whole or in part. Precautions should be taken to prevent the disclosure
of the contents of this material to third parties prior to publication.

HENRY KISSINGER INTERVIEW

For release Sunday, December 1, 1996

(c) 1996, Los Angeles Times Syndicate

This interview with Henry Kissinger was conducted by Davor Butkovic, editor in chief of Globus, published by Europa Press Holding in Croatia.

QUESTION: Why does President Clinton attach so much importance to President (Franjo) Tudjman and his current illness? He recently said that he's the key player in preserving peace in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

ANSWER: President Tudjman created Croatia and reclaimed the Krajina.
I think President Clinton is definitely right; the role of Croatia is
very important in the development of Bosnia.

Q: Does President Tudjman have the most important role in preserving peace in Bosnia?

A: I don't know whether I would like to say the most important role but certainly a very important role. I think all three presidents -- of Croatia, Serbia and Bosnia -- have important roles. I wouldn't want to choose between them.

Q: What will happen in Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina if President Tudjman does not survive?

A: Well, of course, Tudjman has unusual strength and unusual control.
I don't know if a new president could establish a similar authority. I
have publicly stated that I do not believe a great effort should be made
to create a unified Bosnia. I believe that each national group should be
free to do what it wants, and therefore if part of Bosnia wants to join
Croatia it should be permitted to do so. The same for Bosnian Serbs and
Serbia. Q: Tudjman told me back in 1991 that he never believed in a
unified Bosnia, that Bosnia should be divided.

A: I think there could and should be an independent Muslim state. But I would not force Croats and Serbs to live in such a state.

Q: Why does the international community make such a strong effort to keep Bosnia unified?

A: They do it because they have the abstract idea that because
Slovenia and Croatia became independent every other part of the former
Yugoslavia has the right to be independent, too. But I think there are

②

different conditions. Croatia and Slovenia are national entities. Bosnia is a collection of three different ethnic groups.

Q: Do you think that five years ago the international community should have insisted on Bosnia staying in Yugoslavia?...

A: No, I think there should have been a international trusteeship over Bosnia to determine its future. And then one could have given each ethnic group the right to go wherever it wanted to go.

Q: Yes, but Muslims insist on unified Bosnia.

A: I disagree with the Muslims.

Q: But what would you have done if you had been in President Clinton's place? He always had the idea that Bosnia must stay unified.

A: I would have said we have an interest in ending the war to stop the killing. But we have no national interest in unifying Bosnia. And therefore I say each ethnic group should have the right of self-determination.

Q: And how do you see the new announcement that American troops will stay in Bosnia for another 18 months?

A: I support it for peacekeeping. I do not support it for carrying out the political provisions of the Dayton agreement. If the administration wants to enforce the Dayton agreement they will find in 18 months the exact situation they're finding today. It is not enforceable. You will not let the Serbs come back to the Krajina. The Serbs will not let Muslims come back to the parts that they have claimed. There cannot be free movement of refugees without force. I think that's axiomatic. Am I wrong?

Q: No you're right. But if the United States used force somehow...

A: A guerrilla war would start. Look, Croats, Serbs and Muslims could not live together in Yugoslavia. That's why Croatia made itself independent. So why should they live together in Bosnia?

Q: What could the international community have done to stop the war after it started, at the very beginning?

A: One could have intervened against what the Serbs did in Dubrovnik and in the Krajina and elsewhere. And then one could have said we do not tolerate this in Europe. But now that all the populations have been transferred, why reverse it? The only peaceful solution I see is on the basis of the existing dividing lines.

Q: How do you see a long-term solution for territories of former Yugoslavia?

A: Not every problem has a lasting solution. And if you look at the last 400 years at the territory of former Yugoslavia a lot of solutions have been attempted and none have been permanent. So we're talking about a more or less temporary solution. I think in Bosnia that each ethnic group should be free to do what it wants. I actually think that relations between Croatia and Serbia will improve. Now that the Krajina have been settled and Slovenia will be settled in another year or so, what dispute will there be between Croatia and Serbia?

Q: Do you think that Croatia would make a great mistake if it launched military action to retake Slovenia?

A: I think it would be better if Croatia did not use force.

Q: How do you see the American role in this part of the world?

A: Basically some problems have to be solved by the local people. I prefer force not to be used. But it depends what the issue is, what the American role should be. We can do whatever will help if the parties want to then cooperate, but we cannot go around with our military forces unless the national interest of the United States is involved. Not 2 percent of the American people have ever heard of East Slovenia. I bet you not 10 percent of the people know where Bosnia is.

There are a number of things in Bosnia that affect us. Ethnic cleansing in Europe is a terrible thing. Secondly, the outbreak of a significant war in Europe would be a terrible thing. So I can understand if we have taken an interest in this, but I don't agree with the people who argue that it's the same as the German invasion of Czechoslovakia. Bosnia has never existed as a nation before. It's more like the post-colonial struggles in the developing world.

In this area I would favor an American political role. I would favor certain economic growth. I would not favor an American military role.

Q: Do you think it is possible that there will be some conflict between America and Russia over the situation in former Yugoslavia? Russia has been historically allied with Serbia.

A: I don't think that either Russia or U.S. will go to war with each other over Serbia or Croatia. So the capacity of Serbia and Croatia to start a world war is much less than in World War I.

Q: Why was it for United States so important that one official of the Bosnian government must resign before United States sent its shipment of weapons to Bosnia?

A: Because that official is believed to be a supporter of Iran. And I think we made a terrible mistake encouraging Iran to send arms into Bosnia and we don't want a Muslim state tied to Iran at the edge of Europe.

Q: But isn't it one reason more for a unified Bosnia because if we have an isolated Muslim state, then it tends to be tied to Iran or to other Islamic countries?

A: But my position is not that there shouldn't be a unified Bosnian state. My position is that there's no support in America for running military risks on behalf of a unified Bosnian state. If the Bosnians wanted to unite or if the Bosnian federation wanted to continue, I would welcome it. But if they do not want to unite and if each national group wanted to be separate, then I think we should go along with their preference.

Q: Do you think that the Muslim state could survive?

A: I think it can survive. It will not be a brilliant position.

Q: What do you believe the American position toward the states of the former Yugoslavia will be in five years?

A: Well, you have to remember that there's no public opinion about Yugoslavia in the United States. There are a few intellectuals who look at Bosnia as if it were Czechoslovakia, and some who for moral and understandable reasons are against ethnic cleansing. But if you go off the East Coast, if you go to Des Moines or Indianapolis, I guarantee you not 5 percent of the people could find Bosnia on the map. So you cannot say there is a unified policy demanded by the public.

There are two bases for the foreign policy to Yugoslavia. One is that the administration has a global strategy. The second is that there's tremendous political pressure for a variety of reasons, as happened over Sarajevo. The second could happen but there's always a limit because the Congress will insist on pulling our troops out if we have a lot of casualties.

Q: What are your assessments?

A: Well, my judgment has been and is that Slovenia, Croatia and Serbia should all have a dignified national existence. And Bosnia, if it wants to stay together, should unify, but if not it should be partitioned. And the other states like Macedonia will have a difficult existence, too.

Q: What if there is another conflict in Macedonia?

A: It will probably involve Turkey, Greece, Bulgaria, Albania.

Q: And then it's much more dangerous than Bosnia, in fact.

A: More dangerous, yes. It's the tragic Balkan war. So I think we should do our utmost to prevent it. I don't think they will do it. But I think it should be made very clear if a crisis builds up the United States has to be very strong. And we have an interest because we don't want the eastern end of NATO to be broken up.

( END OF TEXT )

NewsCom 11/25/96 04:54:13 PM

Kissinger tape for Anthony Day.

Q. Why does President Clinton attach so much importance to President Franjo Tudjman and his current illness? He recently said that he's the key player in preserving peace in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

A. President Tudjman created Croatia and reclaimed the Krajina. I think President Clinton is definitely right; the role of Croatia is very important in the development of Bosnia.

Q Does President Tudjman have the most important role in preserving peace in Bosnia?

A. I don't know whether I would like to say the most important role but certainly a very important role. I think all three Presidents -- of Croatia, Serbia and Bosnia -- have important roles. I wouldn't want to choose between them.

Q. What will happen in Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina if President Tudjman does not survive?

A. Well of course Tudjman had unusual strength and unusual control. I don't know if a new president could establish a similar authority.

Q. Tudjman told me back in 1991 that he never believed in a

11/25/90 10:19

LAI SINDICATE 444 KISSINGER

002

KISSINGER1 11-25-96

A. I think there could and should be an independent Muslim state. But I would not force Croatians and Serbs to live in such a state.

Q. Why does the international community make such a strong effort to keep Bosnia unified?

A. They do it because they have the abstract idea that because Slovenia and Croatia became independent every other part of the former Yugoslavia has the right to be independent too. But I think there are different conditions. Croatia and Slovenia are national entities. Bosnia is a collection of three different ethnic groups.

Q. Do you think that five years ago the international community should have insisted on Bosnia staying in Yugoslavia.

A. No, I think there should have been an international trustee-ship over Bosnia to determine its future. And then one could have given each ethnic group the right to go wherever it wanted to go.

Q. Yes, but Muslims insist on unified Bosnia.

A. I disagree with the Muslims.

Q. But what would you have done if you had been in President Clinton's place? He always had the idea that Bosnia must stay unified.

A. I would have said we have an interest in ending the war to stop the killing. But we have no national interest in unifying Bosnia. And therefore I say each ethnic group should have the right of self-determination.

11/25/90

10.15

Q415 251 5109

LAI SINDICATE

444 KISSINGER

40005

KISSINGER1 11-25-96

PAGE 3

Q. And how do you see the new announcement that American troops will stay in Bosnia for another 18 months?

A. I support it for peace-keeping. I do not support it for carrying out the political provisions of the Dayton agreement.

If the administraion wants to enforce the Dayton agreement they will find in 18 months the exact situation they're finding today. It is not enforcible. You will not let the Serbs come back to Krajina. The Serbs will not let Muslims come back to the parts that they have claimed. There cannot be free movement of refugees without force. I think that's axiomatic. Am I wrong?

Q. No you're right. But if the United States used force somehow....

A. A guerillas war would start.

A. Look, --- Croats Serbs and Muslims could not live together in Yugoslavia. That's why Croatia made itself independent. So why should they live together in Bosnia?

Q. What could the international community have done to stop the war after it started, at the very beginning?

A. One could have intervened against what the Serbs did in Dubrovnik and in the Krajina and elsewhere. And then one could have said we do not tolerate this in Europe. But now that all the populations have been transferred, why reverse it? The only peaceful solution I see is on the basis of the existing dividing lines.

q. How do you see a long-term solution for territories of

11/25/90 10:20

0213 237 3/09

LAT SINDICATE

KISSINGER

004

KISSINGER1 11-25-96

former Yugoslavia?

A. Not every problem has a lasting solution. And if you look at the last 400 years at the territory of former Yugoslavia a lot of solutions have been attempted and none have been permanent.

Now that the Krajina have been settled and Slavonia will be settled in another year or so, what dispute will there be there between Croatia and Serbia?

Q. Do you think that Croatia would make a great mistake if it launched military action to retake Slavonia?.

A. I think it would be better if Croatia did not use force.

Q How do you see the American role in this part of the world?

A. Basically some problems have to be solved by the local people. I prefer force not to be used. But it depends what the issue is, what the American role should be. We can do whatever will help if the parties want to then cooperate, but we cannot go around with our military forces <u>unless</u> national interest of the United States is involved. Not 2% of the American people who have ever heard of East Slovenia. I bet you not 10% of the people know where Bosnia is.

11/25/96 10:20

0213 237 3/69

LAT SINDICATE

777 KISSINGER

KISSINGER1 11-25-96

There are a number of things in Bosnia that affect us. Ethnic cleansing in Europe is a terrible thing. Secondly the outbreak of a significant war in Europe would be a terrible thing. So I can understand if we have taken an interest in this, but I don't agree with the people who argue that it's the same as the German invasion of Czechoslovakia. Bosnia has never existed as a nation before. It's more like the post-colonial struggles in the developing world.

Q. Do you think is it possible that there will be some conflict between America and Russia over the situation in former Yugoslavia? Russia has been historically allied with Serbia.

A. I don't think that either Russia or U.S. will go to war with each other over Serbia or Croatia. So the capacity of Serbia and Croatia to start a world war is much less than in World War I.

Q. Why was it for United States so important that one official of Bosnian government must resign before United States sent its shipment of weapons to Bosnia?

A. Because that official is believed to be a supporter of Iran.

11/25/96 10:21

0213 237 3/09

LAT SINDICATE

777 KISSINGER

KISSINGER1 11-25-96

Iran at the edge of Europe.

Q. But isn't it one reason more for a unified Bosnia because if we have isolated Muslim state then it tends to be tied to Iran or to other Islamic countries?.

A. But my position is not that there shouldn't be a unified Bosnian state, my position is that there's no support in America for running military risks on behalf of a unified Bosnian state. If the Bosnians wanted to unite or if the Bosnian federation wanted to continue I would welcome it. But if they do not want to unite and if each national group wanted to be separate then I think we should go along with their preference.

Q. Do you think that Muslim state could survive?

A. I think it can survive. It will not be a brilliant position.

Q. What do you believe the American position toward the states of the former Yugoslavia will be in five years?

A. Well you have to remember that it's no public opinion about Yugoslavia in the United States.

There are a few intellectuals some who look at Bosnia as if it were Czechoslovakia, and some who for moral and understandable reasons are against ethnic cleansing but if you go off the East Coast if you go to Des Moines or Indianapolis I guarantee you not 5% of the people would find Bosnia on the map. So you cannot say there is a unified policy demanded by the public. So there are two bases for the foreign policy to Yugoslavia. One that the Administration has a global

11/25/90 10:22

0210 201 0709

LAT INDICATE

444 KISSINGER

007

KISSINGER1 11-25-96

Q What are your assessments?

A. Well my judgment has been and is that Slovenia, Croatia and Serbia should all have a dignified national existence. And Bosnia if it wants to stay together it should unify, but if not it should be partitioned. And that the other states like Macedonia will have a difficult existence. to.

Q. What if there is another conflict in Macedonia?

A. It will probably involve Turkey, Greece, Bulgaria, Albania.

Q. And then it's much more dangerous than Bosnia in fact.

A. More dangerous yes. It's the tragic Bulkan war. So I think we should do our utmost to prevent it.

I don't think they will do it. But I think it should be made very clear if a crisis builds up that the United States has to be very strong. And we have an interest because we don't want to the eastern end of NATO to be broken up.

End of Henry Kissinger tape for Tony Day.

ML

11/25/96 10:18

☎213 237 3769

LAT SYNDICATE

→→→ KISSINGER

☑ 001

Q. Why does President Clinton attach so much importance to President Franjođ Tudjman and his current illness? He recently said that he's the key player in preserving peace in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

I have publicly stated that I do not believe great effort should be made to create a unified Bosnia. I believe that each national group should be free to do what it wants, and therefore if part of Bosnia wants to join Croatia it should be permitted to do so. The same for Bosnian Serbs and Serbia.

11/25/96 10:19

☎213 237 3769

LAT SYNDICATE

→→→ KISSINGER

002

KISSINGER1 11-25-96

PAGE 2

A. No, I think there should have been a international justice over Bosnia to determine its future. And then one could have given each ethnic group the right to go wherever it wanted to go.

11/25/96 10:19

☎213 237 3769

LAT SYNDICATE

→→→ KISSINGER

☑ 003

KISSINGER1 11-25-96

PAGE 3

If the administration wants to enforce the Dayton agreement they will find in 18 months the exact situation they're finding today. It is not enforceable. You will not let the Serbs come back to Krajina. The Serbs will not let Muslims come back to the parts that they have claimed. There cannot be free movement of refugees without force. I think that's axiomatic. Am I wrong?

A. Look, --- Croats, Serbs and Muslims could not live together in Yugoslavia. That's why Croatia made itself independent. So why should they live together in Bosnia?

11/25/96 10:20

☎213 237 3769

LAT SYNDICATE

→→→ KISSINGER

☑ 004

KISSINGER1 11-25-96

former Yugoslavia?

Q How do you see the American role in this part of the world?.

A. Basically some problems have to be solved by the local people. I prefer force not to be used. But it depends what the issue is, what the American role should be. We can do whatever will help if the parties want to then cooperate, but we cannot go around with our military forces ???? national interest of the United States is involved. Not 2% of the American people who have ever heard of East Slovenia. I bet you not 10% of the people know where Bosnia is.

11/25/96 10:20

☎213 237 3769

LAT SYNDICATE

→→→ KISSINGER

005

KISSINGER1 11-25-96

11/25/96 10:21

☎213 237 3769

LAT SYNDICATE

→→→ KISSINGER

☑ 006

KISSINGER1 11-25-96

PAGE 6

Iran at the edge of Europe.

11/25/96

10:22

☎213 237 3769

LAT SYNDICATE

→→→ KISSINGER

☑ 007

KISSINGER1 11-25-96

Q What are your assessments?

ML