Share this story
Close X
Switch to Desktop Site

For Bush, pulling US out of Balkans won't be easy

About these ads

Even before President-elect George W. Bush enters the White House, he's finding out that some campaign goals are easier said than done.

During his candidacy, Mr. Bush and his advisers attacked the Clinton administration for neglecting the armed forces and exacerbating already-low levels of military readiness by overextending troops abroad. In particular, Bush focused on some 11,000 US soldiers in the Balkans, who are keeping the peace after wars in Bosnia and Kosovo. Bush said he would move to withdraw those troops because the region isn't a central US interest.

A closer look, however, reveals a complex situation that could affect at least two key US concerns: Europe and Russia. And Bush is already toning down his statements about withdrawing from the Balkans.

"He's not going to cut and run," said Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison of Texas last week, after she and other lawmakers met with the president-elect to discuss national security issues.

Yet at the same time, Bush does intend to gradually phase out US commitments in the Balkans. And it is also likely that, when new crises arise, Bush will be hesitant to put American soldiers into the mix.

"The chances of more humanitarian intervention in the next four years will be between slim and none," says John Hulsman, a Heritage Foundation analyst who has briefed members of the incoming administration.

This does not mean the US will become isolationist, Mr. Hulsman says, but that the Bush team will practice "realist internationalism." Such a policy would mark a significant departure from that of the Clinton administration, which was criticized at home and abroad for intervening too often and without clear guidelines.

Bush's nominee for secretary of State, retired Gen. Colin Powell, has suggested that the US follow concrete rules for sending troops abroad. The so-called "Powell Doctrine," developed while the general worked under Reagan Secretary of Defense Casper Weinberger, calls for intervention only when vital US interests are at stake and all other means of influence have been exhausted. Furthermore, the action should be swift, overwhelming, and defined, with the support of the American people and Congress.

Yet it remains to be seen if the Powell Doctrine is still applicable in a world that has changed dramatically since the Reagan administration. It is equally unclear whether Powell's priorities remain the same as he tackles a new job.


Page:   1   |   2

Follow Stories Like This
Get the Monitor stories you care about delivered to your inbox.