U.S. Department of State Dispatch Supplement 
Securing a Peace Agreement for Bosnia 
Volume 6, Number 5, December 1995 
Published by the Bureau of Public Affairs 
 
 
                      U.S. Department of State
                        Dispatch Supplement
                        Volume 6, Number 5
                          December 1995

               Securing a Peace Agreement for Bosnia

 
ARTICLES IN THIS ISSUE: 
 
        Negotiating the Dayton Peace Agreement 
1.  The Last Best Chance for Peace in Bosnia-Herzegovina 
--  The Balkan Proximity Peace Talks: A Defining Moment--President 
Clinton 
--  Eyes on Dayton: Bringing Peace to the Heart of Europe--Secretary 
Christopher 
--  The Promise of This Moment Must be Fulfilled--Secretary Christopher 
--  Strengthening American Security Through World Leadership: Bosnia and 
Beyond--Deputy Secretary Talbott 
2.  U.S. Leadership and the Balkan Challenge--Deputy Secretary Talbott 
3.  The Federation: An Essential Building Block of Peace in Bosnia and 
Herzegovina--Secretary Christopher 
 
 
          Initialing the Agreement 
4.  Initialing of the Dayton Peace Agreement 
5.  The Dayton Peace Agreement: Building Peace With Justice--Secretary 
Christopher 
--  Culmination of Intense Diplomatic Negotiations--Secretary 
Christopher 
6.  Agreement Reached on Peace in the Balkans--President Clinton 
7.  U.S. Support for Implementing the Bosnian Peace Agreement--President 
Clinton 
8.  Peace in Bosnia--A Dividend of American Leadership--President 
Clinton 
9. Turning From the Horror of War to the Promise of Peace in the 
Balkans--President Clinton 
 
 
         Fact Sheets and Chronology 
10. Fact Sheet: Summary of the Dayton Peace Agreement 
11. Fact Sheet: The Road to the Dayton Peace Agreement 
12. Fact Sheet: NATO Involvement in the Balkan Crisis 
13. Fact Sheet: Human Rights Issues in the Balkans 
14. Chronology: The Balkan Conflict 
 


[Box Item 
 
General Framework Agreement for Peace In Bosnia and Herzegovina (The 
Dayton Peace Agreement) 
 
The texts of the agreement and related documents are available on the 
World Wide Web through the Department of State Foreign Affairs Network 
(DOSFAN) under the category of "Hot Topics: U.S. Policy on Bosnia" at: 
                 http://dosfan.lib.uic.edu 
 
The texts also are available at the DOSFAN Gopher site at: 
                 gopher://dosfan.lib.uic.edu 
 
 
The texts also will be printed in Dispatch Vol. 7, Supplement No. 1, and 
will be available on "U.S. Foreign Affairs on CD-ROM" (USFAC) in the 
March 1996 release.  One-year subscriptions to USFAC, a quarterly 
archive of U.S. foreign policy information, are available through the 
U.S. Government Printing Office, P.O. Box 371954, Pittsburgh, PA 15250-
7954, tel: (202) 512-1800.  The cost is $81 (domestic) and $101.25 
(foreign).   Payment can be made by check (payable to the Superintendent 
of Documents); GPO Deposit Account; or Visa or MasterCard--include 
account number, expiration date, and authorized signature.   
 
[Box End] 
 
 
 
ARTICLE 1: 
 
The Last Best Chance for Peace In Bosnia and Herzegovina 
President Clinton, Secretary Christopher, Deputy Secretary Talbott 
 
The Balkan Proximity Peace Talks: A Defining Moment  
Opening statement by President Clinton at a press conference, 
Washington, DC, October 31, 1995. 
 
Good morning. I have just met with Secretary Christopher and our Bosnia 
negotiating team, led by Ambassador Holbrooke. As you know, they are 
preparing to leave for Dayton, Ohio, in just a few moments. There, the 
presidents of Bosnia, Croatia, and Serbia will start direct negotiations 
which we hope will lead to a peaceful, lasting settlement in Bosnia. 
 
I want to repeat today what I told President Tudjman and President 
Izetbegovic when we met in New York last week. We have come to a 
defining moment in Bosnia. This is the best chance we've had for peace 
since the war began. It may be the last chance we have for a very long 
time. Only the parties to this terrible conflict can end it. The world 
now looks to them to turn the horror of war into the promise of peace. 
 
The United States and our partners--Russia, Germany, France, and the 
United Kingdom--must do everything in our power to support them. That is 
what I have just instructed Secretary Christopher and our team to do in 
the days ahead in Dayton. We will succeed only if America continues to 
lead. 
 
Already our military strength through NATO and our diplomatic 
determination have advanced the possibility of peace in Bosnia. We can't 
stop now. The responsibilities of leadership are real, but the benefits 
are greater. We see them all around the world--a reduced nuclear threat, 
democracy in Haiti, peace breaking out in the Middle East and in 
Northern Ireland. In Bosnia, as elsewhere, when the United States leads 
we can make progress. If we don't, progress will be much more 
problematic. 
 
Making peace in Bosnia is important to America. Making peace will end 
the terrible toll of this war--the innocent lives lost, the futures 
destroyed. For four years, the people of Bosnia have suffered the worst 
atrocities in Europe since World War II-- mass executions, ethnic 
cleansing, concentration camps, rape and terror, starvation and disease. 
We continue to learn more and more even in the present days about the 
slaughters in Srebrenica. 
 
The best way--the only way--to stop these horrors is to make peace. 
Making peace will prevent the war from spreading. So far, we have been 
able to contain this conflict to the former Yugoslavia. But the Balkans 
lie at the heart of Europe, next door to several of our key NATO allies 
and to some of the new, fragile European democracies. If the war there 
reignites, it could spread and spark a much larger conflict--the kind of 
conflict that has drawn Americans into two European wars in this 
century. We have to end the war in Bosnia and do it now. 
 
Making peace will advance our goal of a peaceful, democratic, and 
undivided Europe--a Europe at peace, with extraordinary benefits to our 
long-term security and prosperity, a Europe at peace, with partners to 
meet the challenges of the new century--challenges that affect us here 
at home, such as terrorism and drug trafficking, organized crime, and 
the spread of weapons of mass destruction. A peaceful, democratic, 
undivided Europe will be that kind of partner. 
 
In Dayton, our diplomats face a tremendous challenge. There is no 
guarantee that they will succeed. America can help the parties negotiate 
a settlement, but we cannot impose a peace. In recent weeks, thanks to 
our mediation efforts, the parties to the war have made real progress. 
The parties have put into effect a Bosnia-wide cease-fire. They have 
agreed to the basic principles of a settlement. Bosnia will remain a 
single state comprised of two entities--but, I repeat, a single state. 
There must be free elections and democratic institutions of government 
at the national and regional levels. 
 
Now, beyond this, many difficult issues remain to be resolved. These 
include the internal boundary between the Bosnia-Croat Federation and 
the Serb Republic, the status of Sarajevo, the practical steps that need 
to be taken to separate hostile forces, and the procedures for free 
elections. Those are just a few of the difficult issues this team will 
have to confront beginning today. I urge the parties to negotiate 
seriously for the good of their own people. So much is riding on success 
in Dayton, and the whole world is watching.  
 
If the parties do reach a settlement, NATO must help secure it, and the 
United States, as NATO's leader, must participate in such an effort. 
Again I say, there is no substitute for American leadership. After so 
many years of violence and bloodshed, a credible international military 
presence in Bosnia is needed to give the parties confidence to live up 
to their own agreements and give them time to begin the long, hard work 
of rebuilding and living together again. NATO is the one organization 
with the track record and the strength to implement a settlement. 
 
As I have said many times, the United States--the source of NATO's 
military strength--must participate. If we don't participate in the 
implementation force, our NATO partners, understandably, would 
reconsider their own commitments. We would undermine American leadership 
of the alliance. We would weaken the alliance itself. And the hard-won 
peace in Bosnia could be lost. 
 
American troops would not be deployed--I say this again--would not be 
deployed unless and until the parties reach a peace agreement. We must 
first have a peace agreement. That is what I would urge the American 
people and Members of Congress to focus on over the next few days. 
Troops would, if going into Bosnia, operate under NATO command, with 
clear rules of engagement and a clearly defined mission. They would not 
be asked to keep a peace that cannot be kept, but they would make sure 
we do our part in helping peace hold. 
 
As the peace process moves forward, I will continue to consult closely 
with the Congress. If a peace agreement is reached, I will request an 
expression of support in Congress for committing United States troops to 
a NATO implementation force. Our foreign policy works best when we work 
together. I want the widest possible support for peace. 
 
But it would be premature to request an expression of support now, 
because we can't decide many of the details of implementation until an 
agreement is clearly shaped and defined. Let me stress again: We are not 
there yet; there are still difficult obstacles ahead. The focus on 
Dayton must be on securing the peace. Without peace, there will be 
nothing for us to secure. 
 
Earlier this month in New Jersey, I had the privilege of spending time 
with His Holiness Pope John Paul II. At the end of our meeting, the Pope 
said something to me I would like to repeat. He said: 
 
"You know, I am not a young man. I have lived through most of this 
century. The 20th century began with a war in Sarajevo. Mr. President, 
you must not let it end with a war in Sarajevo." 
 
All of us must do our part to hear the Pope's plea. Our conscience as a 
nation devoted to freedom and tolerance demands it. Our conscience as a 
nation that wants to end this mindless slaughter demands it. Our 
enduring interest in the security and stability of Europe demands it. 
This is our challenge, and I am determined to do everything I can to see 
that America meets that challenge. 
 
(###) 
 
 
Eyes on Dayton: Bringing Peace To the Heart of Europe 
Statement by Secretary Christopher upon arrival at Wright-Patterson Air 
Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, November 1, 1995. 
 
Good morning. Today, the eyes of the world are on Dayton, Ohio. We have 
come to the heartland of America to try to bring peace to the heart of 
Europe. 
 
On behalf of President Clinton, let me extend my thanks to the people of 
Dayton and the uniformed and civilian personnel of Wright-Patterson Air 
Force Base. They have come together in just two short weeks to support 
this critical effort. I know that their hopes and prayers, like those of 
many millions around the world, are with the peacemakers. 
 
I am here, at the instruction of the President, to ensure that the 
United States does everything possible to bring about a successful 
result at this conference. Later this morning, I will meet with the 
presidents of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, and Serbia. And then, 
this afternoon, I will open this historic peace conference. 
 
Today, we are embarking on a process that may be the last best chance 
for peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina. I hope that, someday, Dayton, Ohio, 
will be remembered as the place where we seized this chance to stop the 
killing and to start building a better future for the people of the 
former Yugoslavia. 
 
(###) 
 
 
The Promise of This Moment Must Be Fulfilled 
Statement by Secretary Christopher at the opening of the Balkan 
Proximity Peace Talks, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, 
November 1, 1995. 
 
Good afternoon. President Izetbegovic, President Tudjman, President 
Milosevic, Prime Minister Bildt, Deputy Minister Ivanov, honored 
colleagues: On behalf of President Clinton and the American people, I 
welcome you to the United States for the start of these historic 
proximity peace talks. My special thanks go to the people of Dayton, 
Ohio, and Wright-Patterson Air Force Base for their magnificent support. 
 
We have an urgent and important purpose today. We are here to give 
Bosnia and Herzegovina a chance to be a country at peace, not a killing 
field--a place where people can sleep in their homes, walk to work, and 
worship in their churches, mosques, and synagogues without fear of 
violence or death. We are here to prevent a wider war that would 
undermine the security of Europe at a time when the whole continent 
should finally be at peace. 
 
The talks that begin here today offer the best chance to achieve peace 
since this war began four years ago. If we fail, the war will resume, 
and future generations will surely hold us accountable for the 
consequences that would follow. The lights so recently lit in Sarajevo 
would once again be extinguished. Death and starvation would once again 
spread across the Balkans, threatening to engulf the region and possibly 
Europe itself. 
 
To the three presidents, I say that it is within your power to chart a 
better future for the people of the former Yugoslavia. The United 
States, the European Union, Russia, and others in the international 
community will help you succeed. But while the world can and will help 
you make peace, only you can ensure that this process will succeed. And 
you must begin today. As President Clinton said yesterday, the "whole 
world is watching." We must persevere until an agreement is reached and 
the promise of this hopeful moment is fulfilled. 
 
There are some who say these talks can only end in failure. They have 
written off the Balkans as a region cursed by its past to a future of 
endless hatred and retribution. I have heard those arguments before--in 
the Middle East, where Arabs and Israelis are now ending an armed 
conflict that has lasted 10 times as long as the one in the former 
Yugoslavia. I have heard the same arguments applied to Northern Ireland, 
where a centuries-old conflict may be nearing resolution. I have heard 
them applied to South Africa, where former enemies have abandoned 
apartheid to build a multi-ethnic democracy. I know that negotiations 
can work when people have the courage and patience to make them work. 
 
We have reached this moment because the international community took 
firm measures to enforce its mandate in Bosnia and Herzegovina and 
because, for the first time, all sides have agreed to a cease-fire, to 
constitutional principles, and to a common set of institutions for a 
single Bosnian state. We must all resolve to stay on the path that 
brought us here. For each of us, the stakes are enormous. 
 
For the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina, whatever their heritage, the 
success of our efforts can mean an end to the killing and the beginning 
of hope for a normal life. The people of Bosnia deserve a chance to live 
as they once did--in harmony with their neighbors in a country at peace. 
 
For the nations at war, the stakes are clear as well. They have a choice 
between two futures--a future of peace and integration or a future of 
violence, poverty, and isolation from Europe and the world. We must 
always remember:  As this region is engulfed in flames and violence, a 
new Europe is being built around it. Some of the fastest-growing 
economies in Europe today are found in this region. The new democracies 
of Central Europe are resolving disputes with their neighbors and 
earning the right to be considered for membership in NATO and the 
European Union. 
 
When the Cold War ended, nobody imagined that once-vibrant cities such 
as Sarajevo, Mostar, and Vukovar would be set so tragically apart from 
Europe by the sight of tanks and the sound of gunfire. The door to 
Europe and the West is still open to the nations of the region--if you 
end this war peacefully and respect the human rights of your people. You 
alone can choose your destiny. 
 
The United States and the international community also have a vital 
stake in sustaining progress toward peace. If war in the Balkans is 
reignited, it could spark a wider conflict like those that drew American 
soldiers in huge numbers into two European wars in this century. If this 
conflict continues--and certainly if it spreads--it would jeopardize our 
efforts to promote stability and security in Europe as a whole. It would 
threaten the viability of NATO, which has been the bedrock of European 
security for 50 years. If the conflict continues, so would the worst 
atrocities Europe has seen since World War II. As President Clinton has 
said, the "only way to stop these horrors is to make peace." We must, 
and we will stay engaged to advance our interests and to uphold our 
values. 
 
The United States and its Contact Group partners will make every effort 
to help you reach an agreement that will settle outstanding questions 
over territory, constitutional arrangements, elections, and the return 
of refugees. We have worked hard to create the right atmosphere for 
progress at this site. And I know that Ambassador Holbrooke, Prime 
Minister Bildt, and Deputy Minister Ivanov will continue to provide the 
most effective and evenhanded mediation that is possible. 
 
If peace is to endure, we must do more than separate the military 
forces. For peace to last, several key conditions must be met. 
 
First, Bosnia and Herzegovina must continue as a single state within its 
internationally recognized borders and with a single international 
personality. The principles to which the parties have agreed provide a 
firm foundation for achieving that goal. 
 
Second, the settlement must take into account the special history and 
significance of Sarajevo and its environs. Sarajevo was the city where 
the first of this century's two bloody world wars began. But 10 years 
ago, it was also the city where the world came together to celebrate the 
Olympics--a city of many communities living, working, and prospering 
together in peace. It must have a chance to become that wonderful city 
again. It deserves that chance. 
 
Third, any agreement must guarantee that the human rights of all the 
citizens of the region are respected. This terrible war has uprooted 
people from every ethnic community. All must be able to return home or 
receive just compensation. And it is vital that all those who have 
committed atrocities are held accountable. Full investigation of all 
such charges, regardless of where they occurred, must be undertaken 
swiftly and firmly, and responsibility must be assigned. 
 
Finally, we also believe that these talks must establish a process of 
normalizing the status of Eastern Slavonia, as a part of Croatia and in 
a peaceful manner. 
 
If and when a formal agreement is reached--but only then--the United 
States and its partners, including Russia, will provide military 
personnel to help implement the peace. NATO is the only organization 
with the resources and capacity to perform this task. It already has 
begun planning for a robust peace implementation force. 
 
For each nation participating in the implementation force, deploying 
soldiers is a difficult and solemn choice. The American people and the 
United States Congress are asking serious and appropriate questions 
about U.S. participation in the implementation force. They will watch 
very closely for signs that the parties are finally ready to lay down 
their arms and begin a lasting, stable peace. 
 
The United States will not send troops where there is no peace to keep. 
Before we deploy, the parties must reach a peace agreement. They must be 
prepared to stick to it. They must use the time when our troops are on 
the ground to consolidate it. And the implementation force must have a 
clear exit strategy. 
 
The international community is also determined to help the people of the 
region rebuild their institutions, their economies, and their lives. The 
Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe will help organize 
and supervise elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina--which ought to come 
at the earliest possible date--to ensure that they are free and fair. 
Under the leadership of the EU, a major effort to support the 
reconstruction of Bosnia and Herzegovina will be launched. Lasting 
security will depend on bringing the region's economy back to life. 
 
In other words, once an agreement is signed, a multi-dimensional effort 
will begin, to help ensure its success. It will be backed by soldiers, 
diplomats, bankers, and engineers; by governments; and by private 
organizations from countries around the world. 
 
We know that Bosnia and Herzegovina will not easily recover from four 
years of ethnic cleansing and destruction. Nothing we do will erase our 
memory of the violence or bring back its victims. But if we succeed, we 
can make it possible for the sons and daughters of those who have died 
to live without fear. If we succeed, we can ensure that the sons and 
daughters of America and Europe do not have to fight again in a larger, 
more terrible war. If we succeed, we may yet realize our vision of a 
Europe at peace, united, prosperous, and free. We must rise to the 
challenge.  
 
This will be a long journey, but it all starts here. Let us get to work, 
and let us reaffirm our pledge to make it work. 
 
(###) 
 
 
Strengthening American Security Through World Leadership:  Bosnia and 
Beyond 
Remarks by Deputy Secretary Talbott at a State Department Town Meeting, 
Washington, DC, November 1, 1995.  
 
On behalf of Secretary Christopher, let me welcome all of you to the 
Dean Acheson Auditorium. Let me also thank Chic Dambach and Harry Blaney 
of the Coalition for American Leadership Abroad for organizing this 
event. I like the name of that organization for reasons that I'll come 
to in a moment. 
 
Over the past nine months, I've attended a number of the Town Hall 
Meetings that Foreign Policy Associations and World Affairs Councils 
have sponsored or supported--in Denver, Dayton, New York, Cleveland, 
Wilmington, Milwaukee, and here in Washington. I have been particularly 
impressed by the ability of these events to bring together diverse 
constituencies: ethnic and religious groups; labor unions and business 
organizations; and civic action groups ranging from the Girl Scouts to 
the Grey Panthers, from the Sierra Club to the Salvation Army.  
 
I urge all of you to expand these grass-roots efforts. I can't think of 
a better way to increase the quantity and the quality of the American 
people's interest in international affairs. And I can't think of a more 
important time for meetings like this one--all across America.  
 
I say that because today, 20 blocks from here, up Constitution Avenue, 
there is a historic national debate underway on the floor of the U.S. 
Congress. Its outcome will effect the future of America's role in the 
world. The Congress is considering legislation that would slash the 
foreign affairs budget of our government by almost 20% from last year's 
levels, and that's on top of a more than 40% decline in real dollars for 
our foreign affairs budget over the past decade.  
 
The Senate has proposed cutting more than $600 million--a whopping 45%--
from our country's annual contributions to international organizations, 
including the United Nations, the World Trade Organization, and the 
International Atomic Energy Agency. Other proposed Senate cuts would 
slash the State Department's operating budget, forcing us to close 
dozens of embassies and consulates around the world.  
 
Secretary Christopher has expressed his deep concern about the impact of 
such cuts on the ability of this Department to serve you when you travel 
abroad; or to make it easier for American businesses to engage 
competitively and profitably in international trade and investment; or 
to protect our cities against international crime, drug-trafficking, and 
terrorism.  
 
We are also facing the reluctance of some in Congress to ratify START II 
and a raft of other important treaties, as well as a refusal to act on a 
number of important ambassadorial nominations. Why is all this 
happening? The answer, I'm sorry to say, is that it is fashionable in 
some influential quarters to flirt with ideas that are isolationist in 
their potential consequence, if not in their actual intent. And why is 
that?  The reason, I believe, is that with the end of the Cold War, 
there's no longer a single, clearly identified, global villain and, 
therefore, no longer a single, simple, bumper-sticker slogan to explain 
America's role in the world. Instead, the world is more complex and, 
therefore, so is the case for American engagement and leadership.  
 
There's a resurgence of the view that we can no longer afford to bear 
the burden of world leadership--or, to put it differently, that we can 
now afford to go it alone in this new, more complicated world of ours. 
Some legislators have even suggested diverting the money that we now 
spend on foreign aid to the construction of a giant fence along our 
borders. Ponder the symbolism of that misguided sense of priorities: The 
instinct here is to wall us in and wall the world out; the instinct is 
to build barriers to ensure that what happens elsewhere--far away or 
right next door--does not affect us here in the United States. 
 
This view is anathema to President Clinton and his Administration. We 
believe that if the United States leads, the world will be a safer place 
for Americans to live, work, travel, and trade. We believe that we face 
historic opportunities not just to combat threats and enemies from 
abroad but also to build a world that promotes our interests and 
reflects our ideals. 
 
The flip side of that conviction is just as important: If we do not 
provide international leadership, then there is no other country on 
earth that can or will step in and lead in our place as a constructive, 
positive influence. America is not just another country; we are a global 
power with global interests. If we do not lead the way in promoting 
freedom, peace, and prosperity on a global scale, no one else will.  
 
So the American Congress, and the American people, now face some 
fundamental choices. At issue is whether we are prepared to do what it 
takes--and that means spending what it takes--to have a foreign policy 
worthy of our aspirations, our opportunities, and our interests as a 
world leader--indeed, as the world leader.    
 
Let me now zero in on a specific region where the choice between 
engagement and isolation, between leadership and retreat, is 
particularly stark--and particularly urgent: that is, in the former 
Yugoslavia. I want to use the remainder of my remarks to address the 
question, much in debate, of why we must lead both in the negotiation of 
a Bosnian peace settlement and in the implementation of an agreement. 
 
Bosnia matters to everyone here today--and to everyone in this country. 
It matters because Europe matters to America. This is not the first time 
that we've sent our soldiers and diplomats across the Atlantic in a time 
of crisis, and it probably will not be the last. Three times before in 
this century, we Americans have joined our European allies in pursuit of 
a common goal--twice in hot wars, once in a cold one. Each time we did 
so for reasons that reflected not just our generosity and our sense of 
obligation to others but that also reflected a hard-headed, forward-
looking calculation of our own needs and safety. That same combination 
of international responsibility and national self-interest underlies our 
involvement in Central Europe and the Balkans today. 
 
We have made significant and promising strides in meeting several 
challenges there. To cite just one example: The interim accord reached 
on September 13 by the governments of Macedonia and Greece was an 
important step toward reducing suspicions and normalizing relations 
between those two countries. But that encouraging development--indeed, 
peace throughout the area--is still threatened by the simmering conflict 
in the former Yugoslavia. If the fighting in Bosnia resumes, it could 
lead to an unraveling of all the progress we've seen and helped bring 
about elsewhere in the region. It could plunge the entire area into war.  
 
That clear and present danger has about it an aspect of deja vu. The 
worst of the 20th century might be said to have begun with a series of 
bad-news stories datelined Sarajevo more than 80 years ago: the Balkan 
wars of 1912 and 1913, followed by the assassination of Archduke Franz 
Ferdinand in 1914 and all that followed. Now there is a very real danger 
that we will inadvertently close out the century with gruesome symmetry, 
by permitting a third Balkan war. Such a conflagration could all too 
easily spread beyond the Balkans.  
 
History and geography have conspired to make Bosnia the most explosive 
powder keg on the continent of Europe. The Drina River, which flows 
through the now-famous town of Gorazde and along the border between 
Bosnia and Serbia, traces one of the world's most treacherous fault 
lines. The three communities that live there--Serbs, Croats, and 
Muslims--bear the legacies of two empires, three religions, and many 
cultures.  
 
That means if the warfare among them breaks out anew and then continues 
unabated, it might extend to several points of the compass, drawing in 
other nations to the north, south, and east. Albania could intervene to 
protect the ethnic Albanians who live in the southern Serbian province 
of Kosovo. Warfare there could unleash a massive flow of refugees into 
Macedonia, destabilizing that fragile country and, potentially, draw- 
ing in, on opposite sides, Greece and Turkey--two NATO allies that are 
also regional rivals. A widening of the war might also see Hungary 
tempted to come to the rescue of ethnic Hungarians in the Vojvodina 
region of northern Serbia.  
 
Bosnia matters outside of Europe as well. The entire Islamic world, from 
Morocco to Indonesia, is watching to see how events unfold. Muslims 
everywhere are waiting to see whether their co-religionists in Bosnia 
will be accorded the same rights and protections as other Europeans. The 
answer to that question could have an impact on the future of moderate, 
pro-Western leaders such as Prime Minister Ciller of Turkey and Prime 
Minister Bhutto of Pakistan. Other less-friendly forces in the Middle 
East and Persian Gulf see the Balkans as a target of opportunity. Iran's 
repeated offer to send "peacemakers" to Bosnia is hardly motivated by 
altruism.  
 
An ongoing conflict in the Balkans would jeopardize our efforts to 
promote stability and security in Europe as a whole; it would undermine 
our ability to consolidate the gains made possible by the triumph of 
democracy and market economics at the end of the Cold War. If the 
fighting in Yugoslavia resumes--and if it escalates and spreads--it 
would put increasing strain  on relations between the United States and 
Russia. A third Balkan war will undermine both of our overarching 
objectives in the region. Those two objectives are, first, to promote 
integration between East and West and, simultaneously, to contain and 
deter the forces of disintegration that have been unleashed by the 
collapse of  communism in the East. 
 
A continuation of the war also would threaten the viability, even the 
survival, of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization. NATO is the anchor 
of American engagement in Europe and the linchpin of transatlantic 
security. We and most of the people of Europe see NATO as the keystone 
of the architecture of European security. As such, NATO must be as 
successful in dealing with the new security challenges in Europe as it 
was in its nearly half-century-long  mission of deterring Soviet 
aggression.  
 
The alliance can no more ignore the conflagration in the Balkans than an 
architect can ignore a fire raging in one wing of a building on which he 
is working. The United States is the leader of the alliance; therefore, 
the United States must lead in Bosnia. Merely hoping that the fire there 
will burn itself out or that someone else will put it out is not just 
wishful thinking. It would be, if it were the basis of policy, extremely 
irresponsible and deeply harmful to our interests.  
 
Such an attitude of standing aside and passing the buck would put us in 
triple jeopardy: It would poison our bilateral relations with Britain, 
France, and other European states that have troops on the ground in 
Bosnia; it would discredit both the alliance and our leadership of it; 
and it would undermine the foundation of a peaceful post-Cold War Europe 
in which we have much of our own security and prosperity invested. 
 
Leadership cannot be a sometime thing, and it is not cost-free. If we 
want to continue to derive the benefits of our unique position--and they 
are legion--we must share with those who follow our lead the costs and 
risks of engagement--and sometimes that means of bold action. 
 
As we ponder those costs and risks, let us also consider those 
associated with inaction, particularly inaction or inadequate action in 
the face of systematic atrocities: mass rape, concentration camps, 
massacres, forced deportation of entire villages. How many of us, four 
years ago, had ever heard of Srebrenica? Today, it is a household word. 
It is not just a place name, it is a synonym for man's inhumanity to 
man. The Yugoslavs may not have invented the phrase "ethnic cleansing," 
but they have inscribed it into the glossary of this century--right 
there next to "final solution"--as an administrative euphemism for 
genocide.  
 
One of the great strengths of our country's foreign policy is that when 
it is at its best, it is rooted as solidly in American idealism as it is 
in American pragmatism. The world continues to look to us for leadership 
not just because of our economic and military might but also because, 
despite our initial reluctance to undertake what George Washington 
described as "foreign entanglements," we as a people have at crucial 
moments been willing to do the right thing.  
 
Doing the right thing in the Balkans has been especially difficult. 
There were, for a long time, severe limits on what we--the United States 
and the international community--could do to make peace until the 
parties themselves were prepared to do so. But there is no question what 
doing the right thing means today, and today is surely a crucial moment. 
It means using a combination of diplomatic skill and the credible threat 
of force to keep the parties at the negotiating table. It means 
deterring them from returning to the battlefield and to the killing 
fields. It means, in short, putting an end to genocide and, to the 
maximum extent possible, bringing to justice the perpetrators of crimes 
against humanity. By the way--this, I believe, is a very important 
point--the unacceptability of "ethnic cleansing" in the Balkans, by that 
or any other name, is not just an issue of moralpolitik, it is also an 
issue of realpolitik.  
 
The concept of ethnic cleansing captures the practical, concrete essence 
of the catastrophe that has befallen that troubled and troublesome 
neighborhood of the global village. Too many leaders of the former 
Yugoslav republics have tried to define statehood and citizenship and 
international boundaries in terms of ethnic homogeneity-- ethnic purity-
-and thus have sought to "purify" or cleanse the state of "impure" 
elements. Hence the dream of Greater Serbia, which is a nightmare for 
all non-Serbs, whether they live in Serbia proper or amidst ethnic Serbs 
in neighboring states. Equally noxious is the dream of an ethnically 
"pure" Croatia that would deny the legitimate rights of Muslims and 
ethnic Serbs.  
 
I stress this point because there is more at stake here than just the 
Balkans. If aggressive, exclusionary nationalism triumphs in the former 
Yugoslavia, it would be a disaster not only in that region but ominous 
for the former Soviet empire, where similar dark forces of what might be 
called Balkanization are vying with those of freedom to fill the vacuum 
left by the collapse of communist totalitarianism. 
 
If there is to be a post-Cold War peace in Europe--and not a cold peace 
but a real one--it must be based on the principle of multi-ethnic, 
pluralistic democracy. Since the United States is one of the first and 
certainly one of the greatest examples of that principle, we have a 
stake in seeing that it ultimately prevails in Europe and elsewhere. 
 
So, ladies and gentlemen, for all these reasons, ending the war in 
Bosnia is unquestionably in the national interest of the United States. 
We have been working toward that objective since the beginning of the 
Administration, but only recently have our efforts shown real promise.  
 
President Clinton has long pressed for the vigorous use of NATO airpower 
as a necessary component of peace-making. The fall of Srebrenica in 
early July was a turning point. It galvanized the willingness of the 
international community to do more to protect the UN-designated safe 
areas and punish continuing Serb aggression. The London Conference in 
late July streamlined the mechanism for backing diplomacy with real 
force: no more "dual key;" no more pin-prick air strikes.  
 
Seizing the moment, President Clinton undertook a new diplomatic 
initiative. First Tony Lake, then Dick Holbrooke worked the diplomatic 
front. Meanwhile, U.S. and NATO warplanes, no longer grounded by the 
dual key, reinforced more emphatically than before the message that the 
time had come to stop the killing and start talking about the terms for 
a lasting political settlement. 
 
Since then, Dick Holbrooke and his team have made real progress. They 
have worked in close cooperation with the other members of the Contact 
Group--Britain, France, Germany, and Russia--and with the support of 
other troop-contributing nations.  
 
In early September, the foreign ministers of Croatia, Bosnia, and Serbia 
agreed on a set of basic principles for a political settlement. Most 
significantly, each of the parties has accepted the continuation of 
Bosnia and Herzegovina as a single, multi-ethnic state within its 
current, internationally recognized borders. Within that state, the 
parties have agreed that there will be two constituent entities. They 
have also agreed to work out mechanisms to ensure respect and equality 
for all the citizens of Bosnia. 
 
Today, the negotiations move up to the next level. Secretary Christopher 
just returned on Monday night from the Middle East--another region that 
American leadership is helping to move from war to peace. Five hours 
from now, he will welcome the Presidents of Bosnia, Croatia, and Serbia 
to Wright-Patterson Air Force Base in Dayton, Ohio. Representatives  of 
the other Contact Group countries, along with the envoy of the European 
Union, will be there, too.  
 
Secretary Christopher will present the parties with a draft peace 
agreement as well as with detailed constitutional and territorial 
proposals for a future Bosnian state. The package includes a separation-
of-forces agreement, a proposal for national elections, and an agreement 
on the return of refugees. Obviously, there is still a long way to go.  
 
If--and it's still a big "if"--the Dayton talks are successful and the 
three heads of state agree on a peace settlement, then the tough work of 
implementation will begin. There, , too, the United States must lead. 
 
After four years of brutal war, there is, to put it mildly, little trust 
left among the Muslim, Croat, and Serb communities in Bosnia. It will 
require an armed international presence to give the parties the 
confidence that they need to carry out the settlement. The mission of 
the international force will include verifying and, if necessary, 
enforcing compliance with the commitments that the parties will have 
undertaken in whatever agreement emerges from the Dayton talks. 
 
There is only one organization that can give the parties the necessary 
assurance to implement a peace, and that is NATO. That is why President 
Clinton, President Chirac, Prime Minister Major, and other leaders have 
agreed that if the parties choose the path of peace, then the United 
States, France, and the United Kingdom will participate  with their 
allies in a NATO-led implementation force--IFOR. 
 
Let me stress, as President Clinton has, that IFOR will be deployed only 
if the parties agree to a real peace. Let me also note that although 
this will be a NATO-led operation, we are also seeking to find ways for 
other nations that are not members of the alliance to participate as 
well. Poland, Hungary, the Czech and Slovak Republics, Ukraine, 
Pakistan, and Bangladesh have expressed an interest in contributing.  
 
On Monday of last week, Presidents Clinton and Yeltsin reached a 
landmark agreement: Russian and U.S. forces will participate together in 
the implementation of a Bosnian peace. Last Friday, Bill Perry and his 
Russian counterpart, Pavel Grachev, hammered out many of the details. 
Russia and the United States will each contribute several thousand 
soldiers to a special operations unit under the command of U.S. Army 
Gen. George Joulwan. That unit will provide vital engineering, 
reconstruction, road-building, bridge repair, mine-clearing, and heavy-
lift services. It represents the most concrete example of U.S.-Russian 
military cooperation in the post-Cold War era. It is welcome in its own 
right and also as a precedent for the future.   
 
In conclusion, I would like to return to the issue I put before you at 
the outset of these remarks: We are, as I said earlier, now in the midst 
of a historic debate about America's role in the world. Bosnia is one 
test of where we stand, but there will be many others in the months and 
years to come.  
 
President Clinton is convinced that the United States has the heart, the 
brains, and the muscle to exercise international leadership and to do so 
on behalf of our interests and our values. But whether the President's 
views win out in the end against those who advocate retreat will depend 
in no small measure on how these questions are debated beyond the floor 
of the Congress and beyond the Washington Beltway. It will depend on how 
they are addressed in Town Hall Meetings and gatherings such as this one 
across America. Which is to say, my colleagues from whom you will be 
hearing today and I are all counting on you and the groups represented 
here to make sure that we, as a nation, ask the right questions--and 
that we come up with the right answers.  
 
(###) 
 
 
U.S. Leadership and the Balkan Challenge 
Deputy Secretary Talbott 
Remarks at the National Press Club, Washington, DC, November 9, 1995 
 
Thank you, Bud [Karmin]. And thanks to all of you for the chance to be 
here today. I have been to many of these events over the years, and I am 
glad to return for the first time in an official capacity. I do so to 
discuss with you the American effort to bring peace to the former 
Yugoslavia. Let me begin with an update on the Dayton talks.   
 
I was out there on Monday to meet with Dick Holbrooke's team, with Carl 
Bildt and the Contact Group, and with the leaders of the parties to the 
conflict. Most of the draft documents that comprise the overall peace 
agreement are now in the hands of the parties. Those include detailed 
constitutional and territorial proposals for a future Bosnian state, a 
separation-of-forces agreement, a plan for national elections, and an 
agreement on the return of refugees. There are, every day, numerous, 
intensive meetings on virtually every aspect of the prospective 
settlement. President Tudjman returned to Dayton last night. We hope to 
use his presence to make some progress on the problem of Eastern 
Slavonia. Secretary Christopher will be going to Dayton tomorrow to 
provide further high-level support for the process.  
 
That's it. The lid is back on until about this time tomorrow, when you 
can tune in with Nick Burns for your next glimpse into what we're 
trying, for solid diplomatic reasons, to keep as tightly under wraps as 
possible.  
 
What I'd like to do now is step back and look at the larger question of 
what's at stake in Dayton. That means having a clear sense of the 
consequences for our country and for the world if the talks were to fail 
and the Balkans were to be plunged back into war. Then I'd like to look 
ahead to the challenge we will face if the Dayton talks succeed.  
 
Many of you have pointed out that the Administration has a tough job of 
persuasion here on the home front--up on the Hill but beyond the Beltway 
as well. We know it. It's not self-evident to the American people why a 
conflict nearly 5,000 miles from here matters enough to justify a heavy 
investment of our treasure, prestige, and military resources.  
 
So let me start right there. Bosnia matters to Americans because Europe 
matters to America. War in Bosnia threatens the peace of Europe--
particularly, though not exclusively, those parts of Europe that are 
emerging from Soviet-era dictatorships. And that means it threatens the 
transatlantic community of which we are a part--and of which we are a 
leader.   
 
The conflict in the Balkans is a direct consequence of the end of the 
Cold War. During that nearly half-century-long struggle, we were 
concerned about the spread of communist order. Now that the Cold War is 
over, we face a very different threat: the spread of post-communist 
disorder.   
 
That danger exists in part because of where the former Yugoslavia is. It 
is on a fault line between East and West, between Europe and Asia. If 
warfare breaks out anew and continues unabated, it could suck in other 
nations to the north, south, and east. Albania could intervene to 
protect the ethnic Albanians who live in the southern Serbian province 
of Kosovo. Fighting there could cause a massive flow of refugees into 
Macedonia, destabilizing that fragile, newly independent country and, 
perhaps, drawing in, on opposite sides, Greece and Turkey. A widening of 
the war might also tempt Hungary to come to the rescue of ethnic 
Hungarians in the Vojvodina region of northern Serbia.  
 
Meanwhile, the entire Islamic world is watching. Muslims everywhere are 
waiting to see whether their co-religionists in Bosnia will be accorded 
the same rights and protections as other Europeans. The answer to that 
question could have an impact on the future of moderate, pro-Western 
leaders such as Prime Minister Ciller of Turkey and Prime Minister 
Bhutto of Pakistan. Other forces in the Middle East and Persian Gulf see 
the Balkans as a target of opportunity. Iran's repeated offer to send 
"peacekeepers" to Bosnia is hardly motivated by altruism.   
 
Then there is the fate of NATO. A continuation of the war would threaten 
the viability of an organization that is vital to us and to Europe. If 
we were to adopt a posture of standing aside with our fingers crossed 
behind our backs, we would harm our bilateral relations with Britain, 
France, and other allies that have troops on the ground in Bosnia. We 
would also discredit the alliance as a whole and our role in it.   
 
Another point: If the fighting in Yugoslavia resumes--and if it 
escalates and spreads--it would put increasing strain on relations 
between the United States and Russia, and it would do so at a time of 
ferment and uncertainty in Russian domestic politics. In short, a new 
eruption of fighting in the Balkans would undermine our twin strategic 
objectives in Europe. Those are, first, to advance integration between 
East and West and, second, to restrain post-communist disintegration in 
the East.   
 
So those are the stakes. High stakes justify--indeed, require--bold 
action. We must, of course, be hard-headed in assessing the costs and 
risks that come with such action. But we must be just as tough-minded in 
recognizing the costs and risks that we will incur if we choose 
inaction--particularly inaction, or inadequate action, in the face of 
atrocities like mass rape, concentration camps, massacres, and forced 
deportations. As recently as August, the Bosnian Serb authorities in 
Banja Luka made local Muslims wear special white arm bands and marked 
their homes with white cloth, all as a prelude to "ethnic cleansing." 
That administrative euphemism, coupled with the deja vu of the arm 
bands, makes clear what we have been up against in Bosnia: In a word--
and it is the right word--it is genocide in our time, genocide on the 
continent of Europe.   
 
At issue here is not just an outrage against humanity but a challenge to 
American interests and American leadership. Far away peoples look to us 
and count on us not just because of our economic strength and the power 
of our armed forces, but also because of what we stand for--and what 
we're prepared to act against.   
 
Taking decisive action in the Balkans has been especially difficult. 
There were, for a long time, severe limits on what the international 
community could do to make peace until the parties themselves were 
prepared to do so. But there is no question what is required today. It 
is a combination of diplomatic skill and the credible threat of force to 
keep the parties at the negotiating table, and that means keeping them 
from returning to the battlefield--not to mention the killing fields. It 
also means putting an end to genocide and bringing to justice the 
perpetrators of crimes against humanity.  
 
That is why we fully support the work of Judge Richard Goldstone and the 
United Nations War Crimes Tribunal. We have dispatched 23 officials of 
our government to work as prosecutors and researchers for the Tribunal, 
and we are fighting on Capitol Hill to preserve its funding. We are also 
making an energetic, systematic effort to provide the war crimes 
investigators and prosecutors with the facts they need to do their work. 
Even when relevant information comes from intelligence or other 
classified sources, we'll find a way to get it to Judge Goldstone in a 
timely and useful manner. John Shattuck, our Assistant Secretary for 
human rights, is now traveling across Bosnia. This is his fourth trip 
there in two months. His mission is to mobilize the full resources of 
the U.S. Government in the investigation of atrocities and to gather 
additional material that we will provide to the Tribunal.   
 
Let me add that all of us recognize the crucial, sometimes heroic role 
that the press has played in informing the world about the horror in the 
Balkans. You, like we, have lost colleagues. Even with a cease-fire in 
place, covering the situation remains dangerous, as we were all reminded 
by the ordeal of David Rohde. In talking to Mr. Rohde yesterday, 
President Clinton and Secretary Christopher made it clear that we intend 
to hold Serb officials to their commitments that Western journalists as 
well as Western diplomats will have access to the suspected sites of 
human rights violations.  
 
The War Crimes Tribunal has already issued 46 indictments, including 
three more this morning, and Judge Goldstone, who will be in Washington 
next week, has told us to expect dozens more to come soon. We have made 
it clear that no indicted war criminals will be involved in 
negotiations, in the signing of agreements, or in subsequent elections. 
The peace process will not impede the investigation of atrocities or the 
prosecution of those responsible. Indicted war criminals like Dr. 
Karadzic and General Mladic should recognize that amnesties and 
immunities are not on the table in Dayton or anywhere else. If we or any 
other responsible members of the international community apprehend them, 
they will get a quick, one-way trip to the courtroom at Churchill Plein 
#1 in The Hague.  
 
Let me say a few more words about "ethnic cleansing" in the Balkans and 
why that phenomenon, by that or any other name, is  not  only an issue 
of moralpolitik, it is also an issue of realpolitik. Even when the 
phrase "ethnic cleansing" means "merely" mass deportation rather than 
mass murder, it captures the essence of what is most insidious--and most 
contagious--about the catastrophe that has befallen the former 
Yugoslavia.   
 
Too many leaders of those republics-turned-independent-states have tried 
to define statehood, citizenship, and international boundaries in terms 
of ethnic homogeneity and ethnic purity. Hence the dream of Greater 
Serbia, which is a nightmare for all non-Serbs, whether they live in 
Serbia proper or amid ethnic Serbs in neighboring states.   
 
Equally unacceptable is the idea of an ethnically "pure" Croatia that 
would deny the legitimate rights of Croatian Muslims and Serbs. We have 
given President Tudjman a clear, unambiguous message, and we have given 
it to him in Dayton as well as in Zagreb: If Croatia wants the benefits 
of membership in the community of market democracies--if it wants to 
enjoy international respectability--then it will have to ensure the non-
Croats in its population have the full rights and protections of 
citizenship. Our support for Croatia is contingent on Croatia's 
continuing support for the Bosnian Federation. Moreover, we will, along 
with our allies, do everything we can to discourage the irredentist 
fantasies of any leader in the Balkans. I stress this point because if 
aggressive nationalism triumphs in the former Yugoslavia, it will not 
only be devastating in that region--it will be ominous elsewhere as 
well, especially to the north and to the east.   
 
Throughout the former Soviet empire, dark forces similar to those that 
have convulsed the Balkans are vying with those of freedom and tolerance 
to fill the partial vacuum left by the collapse of communist rule. Just 
to cite one example: The lethal syndrome we often call Balkanization 
could just as well be termed Caucasusization. The peoples of Georgia, 
Azerbaijan, and Armenia have suffered in much the same way as the people 
of the Balkans. If there is to be a post-Cold War peace in Europe--and 
not a cold peace, but a real one--it must be based on the principle of 
multi-ethnic democracy.   
 
The United States is one of the first and one of the greatest examples 
of that principle. What' s more, the civic behavior and constitutional 
structures associated with pluralism are conducive to regional peace and 
international trade. Hence, it is in our interest that multi-ethnic 
democracy ultimately prevails in Europe and elsewhere.  
 
Can those values and institutions ever take hold in the former 
Yugoslavia? I realize there is a lot of skepticism if not cynicism on 
that point. Many assert, or at least imply, that the conflict among 
Serbs, Croats, and Muslims is, quite simply, insoluble; that the region 
is a permanent and hopeless quagmire--a word intended to have, in our 
ears, cautionary echoes of Vietnam. Listen carefully and you will 
sometimes hear in the current debate a hint that there is something in 
the air or the water of the Balkans that dooms those wretched people to 
slaughter each other. That's often the subliminal message, I believe, of 
the cliche about "ancient hatreds."  
 
Having lived in Yugoslavia for two years--and having seen how the South 
Slavs could live harmoniously with each other--I find this view wrong-
headed in the extreme. There was nothing predestined about the horror 
that has been raging in the Balkans for the past four years. It was 
foolish, demagogic local politics, along with short-sighted 
international diplomacy, that helped trigger, in the late 1980s and 
early 1990s, the third Balkan war of this century.   
 
By the same token, it will take sound, far-sighted diplomacy, including 
plenty of American leadership and statesmanship, to head off a 
resumption and escalation of that war now. That task will be hard enough 
without encumbering ourselves with the excess baggage of historical, not 
to mention ethnic, determinism.   
 
Let' s remember, as we put our shoulder to the wheel in the Balkans, 
that patience and persistence have paid off in other areas that were 
long believed to be in the "too hard" category--the Middle East, 
Northern Ireland, and South Africa. There's hope for the former 
Yugoslavia, too.   
 
Why is that hope realistic today when it seemed so forlorn only a few 
months ago? President Clinton has pressed for the vigorous use of NATO 
air power as a necessary component of peacemaking since the early days 
of his Presidency. But it took 2 1/2 years for the pieces of the puzzle 
to come together in a way that would permit that strategy to work.   
 
The murderous Serb capture of Srebrenica in early July was a turning 
point. It moved the international community to take a quantum leap in 
what it was willing to do to protect the United Nations-designated safe 
areas and to punish continuing Serb aggression. As Secretary 
Christopher's urging, the London Conference in late July streamlined the 
mechanism for backing diplomacy with real force: no more cumbersome 
"dual key" arrangements; no more pinprick air strikes.   
 
Seizing the moment, President Clinton undertook a new diplomatic 
initiative. Secretary Christopher, Tony Lake, and Dick Holbrooke worked 
the diplomatic front. Meanwhile, U.S. and NATO warplanes, no longer 
grounded by the dual key, reinforced much more convincingly than before 
the message that the time had come to stop the killing and start talking 
about the terms for a lasting political settlement.  
 
Since then, our negotiating team has made real progress. The parties 
have accepted the continuation of Bosnia-Herzegovina as a single, multi-
ethnic state within its current, inter- nationally recognized borders. 
Within that state, the parties have agreed that there will be two 
constituent entities. That arrangement will, we believe, make it 
possible for fratricidal passions to cool. The people of Bosnia need 
time to recover from the disintegration that they've been through--and 
to rediscover first the possibility, then the advantages, of 
integration.  
 
If--and it's still a big "if"--the Dayton talks succeed, and the three 
heads of state agree on a peace settlement, then the tough work of 
implementation will begin. There, too, the United States must lead. That 
means we must be willing to send troops. Let me walk you through the 
logic of why that is true.   
 
After four years of brutal war, there is, to put it mildly, little trust 
left among the different communities in Bosnia. Peace will require an 
armed international presence to give the parties the confidence that 
they need to carry out the settlement and to begin the long, hard work 
of rebuilding  and living together again.  
 
Only one organization can enforce a peace, and that is NATO. Both the 
parties to the conflict and our NATO allies have made clear that they 
are counting on significant U.S. participation in the implementation 
force. Without our being there, the force as a whole won't be there, in 
which case there will be no peace, and we will face the array of 
consequences I have outlined here.  
 
Let me stress, as President Clinton did again yesterday in meeting with 
congressional leaders, two points: first, the implementation force will 
be deployed only if the parties agree to a real peace, and second, the 
force will be militarily formidable. It will be capable not only of 
defending itself but also of compelling the parties to the peace 
agreement to live up to the commitments embodied in the peace 
settlement.  
 
We believe that 12 months is a reasonable period of time for the 
implementation force to accomplish its mission. While this will be a 
NATO-led operation, other nations, not members of the alliance, will 
also participate. So far, more than a dozen states--including Poland, 
Hungary, the Czech and Slovak Republics, Ukraine, and Pakistan--have 
expressed an interest in contributing.   
 
So has Russia. Yesterday, Bill Perry and Pavel Grachev, his Russian 
counterpart, met in Brussels to hammer out the details of a joint 
operation.  It will represent the most concrete example of U.S.-Russian 
military cooperation in the post-Cold War era. It is welcome in its own 
right and also as a precedent for the future--a future in which we hope 
that Russia and the U.S., and for that matter Russia and NATO, will find 
numerous ways to work together in building an undivided Europe.  
 
Let me conclude by expanding on that last point: The conflict in the 
former Yugoslavia has gone on for far too long; it has been the cause of 
far, far too much carnage, too much misery, too much frustration, too 
much tension between us and our partners--old and new. All of us wish 
that something like the Dayton talks could have taken place a year ago, 
better yet two years ago--better still three or four. But we are where 
we are, and we must make the best of what we have before us today.   
 
And what we have today is an opportunity, far from certain and still 
fraught with danger but, nonetheless, real, to turn Bosnia from a 
synonym for past failures and an evil portent for the future into 
something positive. Bosnia could yet turn out to be a demonstration, 
however belated, of international resolve to meet the first major 
challenge to the collective security of post-Cold War Europe.  
 
Taking advantage of this opportunity and passing this test will require 
steadfastness in our diplomatic efforts and in our military commitment. 
But success will also require public and congressional support. And to 
muster and sustain that support, we had better have the best possible 
answers to the toughest possible questions--starting with yours right 
now.  
 
Thank you very much.  
 
(###) 
 
 
 
ARTICLE 3: 
 
The Federation: An Essential Building Block of Peace in Bosnia and 
Herzegovina 
Secretary Christopher 
Statement at the signing of the Agreement Implementing the Federation of 
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, 
November 10, 1995 
 
Thank you. Let me say a few words about what has been achieved here 
today. 
 
The Federation is an essential building block of peace in Bosnia and 
Herzegovina as a whole. In the peace agreement we are discussing, the 
Federation will be one of Bosnia's two constituent parts. For a 
settlement to endure, the Federation must be functioning and strong. 
 
A year and a half ago, the United States helped to mediate the agreement 
that created the Federation. That agreement saved countless lives by 
ending the fighting between the Bosniac and Croat communities of Bosnia 
and Herzegovina. Until today, however, many serious obstacles to 
implementation remained, including the slow development of common 
institutions, restrictions on the freedom of movement within the 
Federation, and the continued division of Mostar. Today, the parties 
have adopted a plan to resolve each of these problems. 
 
As it is implemented, today's agreement will bring the Federation to 
life. It will create common political and economic institutions that 
will unite the two communities. It will be a model for inter-ethnic 
cooperation and renewed trust in a country that is sorely in need of 
both. 
 
This agreement was negotiated under the auspices of the U.S. and German 
delegations in Dayton. It certainly could not have been reached without 
the determination of President Izetbegovic and of President Tudjman. 
 
The Contact Group and the European Union were also our full partners. 
Like the United States, the EU is dedicated to the idea that one 
community can be forged from many disparate parts. We share the 
conviction that Europe's post-Cold War peace must be based on the 
principle of multi-ethnic democracy. 
 
The agreement finally gives the Federation the authority to govern 
effectively. The central government of Bosnia and Herzegovina will keep 
the powers it needs to preserve the country's sovereignty, including 
foreign affairs, trade, and monetary policy. It will transfer most of 
its other responsibilities, including police, courts, tax collection, 
health, and education to the Federation. The new structures the 
agreement creates will replace all of the separate, local Croat and 
Muslim authorities on Federation territory. 
 
The agreement commits the Federation to respect the human rights of all 
who live within it regardless of their ethnic background and to allow 
them to move about its territory freely.Federation authorities will 
develop and implement a comprehensive plan to permit refugees and 
displaced persons to return to their homes. 
 
The agreement provides for the sharing of revenues and a joint customs 
administration. Internal customs check points, which had marred the 
Federation before, will be removed. Finally, the parties have agreed to 
the reunification of the city of Mostar under a single administration. 
 
Of course, the true test of this agreement will lie in the way it is 
carried out. The parties have agreed to report to the United States, 
Germany, and the EU every two weeks on the progress they are making. We 
will monitor that progress carefully, and we stand ready to help them 
however we can. 
 
It will not be easy. But today, we can celebrate another moment of hope 
in this long, hard process of building the Federation. The parties have 
understood that peace means more than the absence of war. It requires 
practical cooperation and the mutual recognition of shared interests. In 
the case of Bosnia-Herzegovina, the ugly alternative is starkly 
symbolized by the shattered bridge that once united the city of Mostar. 
 
It is certainly harder to build bridges than it is to tear them down. 
And some people, of course, still believe that the conflict between 
Muslims, Croats, and Serbs is insoluble. By making the Federation work, 
the communities this agreement unites are showing that view to be 
cynical and false. After all, until recently, the peoples of Bosnia-
Herzegovina lived together in peace. They deserve a chance to do so 
again. 
 
If the Federation can succeed as a multi-ethnic democracy, then so can 
Bosnia-Herzegovina as a whole. A comprehensive peace remains our 
fundamental challenge here in Dayton. The agreement we signed today is 
an important first step and a sign that progress is possible when the 
parties are determined to achieve it.  
 
(###) 
 
 
 
ARTICLE 4: 
 
Initialing of the Dayton Peace Agreement 
Following are remarks by Secretary Christopher; the Presidents of 
Serbia, Croatia, and Bosnia and Herzegovina; Representatives of the 
European Union; and the Contact Group and negotiating team members at 
the signing ceremony, Wright-Patterson  Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, 
November 21, 1995.  
 
Secretary Christopher. President Izetbegovic, President Milosevic, 
President Tudjman, former Prime Minister Carl Bildt, Deputy Minister 
Ivanov, General Shalikashvili, Deputy Secretary White, Senator Jim 
Jefforrds, honored colleagues, guests, ladies and gentlemen: Three weeks 
ago, the people of the United States welcomed all of us to Dayton and 
urged that the three Presidents seize this last best chance for peace in 
the former Yugoslavia.  
 
Today, you will leave Dayton with a comprehensive agreement in hand. On 
this Thanksgiving weekend, our joint work has made it possible for the 
people of Bosnia to spend New Year's Day in peace for the first time in 
four years. In a moment, the three Presidents will initial the 
agreement. They have come a long way in the last 20 days, and their 
initialing here today will signal their determination to stay on the 
path of peace.  
 
To the three presidents, I especially want to thank you for your hard 
and skillful work over the last 20 days. You have cooperated splendidly 
and given a great deal of attention to these tough problems.  
 
I will witness the agreement on behalf of the United States, as will 
Carl Bildt on behalf of the European Union and Deputy Minister Ivanov on 
behalf of the Russian Federation. The agreement will also be witnessed 
by the heads of the other Contact Group missions: Ambassador Jacques 
Blot of France; Wolfgang Ischinger of Germany; Pauline Neville-Jones of 
the United Kingdom.  
 
Before we begin today, I want to pay a special tribute on behalf of the 
United States and the other delegations here to the people of Dayton and 
especially to the people of the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. With 
very little time to prepare for this immensely complicated endeavor, the 
people of the base provided us with marvelous support from the very 
beginning. They created exactly the right atmosphere for success. Our 
choice of Wright-Patterson Air Base here in Dayton turned out to be 
better than we could possibly have expected, and we are grateful to all 
of you.  
 
Now let's proceed with the initialing of the agreement. 
 
[All parties initial the agreement.]  
 
 
Secretary Christopher. Ladies and gentlemen, we have reached a day that 
many believed would never come. After three weeks of intensive 
negotiations here in Dayton, the leaders of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 
Croatia, and Serbia have agreed to end the war in the former Yugoslavia. 
They have agreed that four years of destruction is enough. The time has 
come to build peace with justice.  
 
Today's agreement would not have come without the vision and leadership 
of President Clinton. The diplomatic and military strategy that he 
launched this summer has borne fruit. I'm gratified at the result and 
determined that it should be put into effect.  
 
We've come to this hopeful moment because the parties made the 
fundamental choice that lasting peace can be achieved here, and they've 
done the things that peace requires. We're here because the 
international negotiating team successfully led the parties to this 
agreement.  
 
Assistant Secretary Holbrooke and his team took a hard and exacting task 
and succeeded in a way that will be long-remembered and admired. I also 
want to recognize the tireless efforts of somebody who couldn't be here 
today, my friend and colleague, National Security Adviser Tony Lake, who 
played a very important role all through this endeavor. The European 
Union and the members of the Contact Group--Germany, France, the United 
Kingdom and Russia--were with us at every critical step of this long 
negotiating process.  
 
No one thought that these negotiations would be easy, and all of us here 
on the stage can testify to the fact that they were not. Nevertheless, 
we got what we wanted--a comprehensive settlement, and one that must now 
be implemented. The hard-won commitments that have been initialed today 
address the wrenching and fundamental issues for which the war was 
fought and which must be resolved if peace is to endure.  
 
Today's agreement assures the continuity of the single state of Bosnia 
and Herzegovina, with effective federal institutions, a single currency, 
and full respect by its neighbors for its sovereignty. The city of 
Sarajevo, which has gripped the attention of the world for such a long 
time, will no longer be divided. It will be unified under the Federation 
of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Checkpoints and closed bridges will no longer 
divide the families of that city. All of Bosnia's people will have a 
right under these agreements to move freely throughout the country. 
Refugees and displaced persons will have a right to return to their 
homes or to receive just compensation. Free and democratic elections 
will be held next year.  
 
The agreement contains strong human rights provisions. It confirms the 
parties' obligations to cooperate fully in the investigation and 
prosecution of war crimes. The agreement excludes indicted war criminals 
from public office, or military office, in this new government.  
 
The agreement requires the parties to withdraw their armed forces to 
agreed positions, and it also provides for important confidence-building 
measures among the parties. The parties have pledged to cooperate fully 
with a NATO-led peace implementation force and to ensure the safety of 
its personnel, and it sets the stage for a comprehensive program of 
reconstruction so necessary in that beleaguered country.  
 
Today's agreement certainly does not erase the stark memories of the 
past nor does it guarantee that the fabric of the society of Bosnia will 
be easily restored. But, still, it is a victory for all of us. It is a 
victory for people of every heritage in the former Yugoslavia. It offers 
tangible hope that there will be no more days of dodging bullets, no 
more winters of freshly dug graves, no more years of isolation from the 
outside world.  
 
The agreement is a victory for all of those who believe in a multi-
ethnic democracy in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Securing that goal will 
require an immense effort in the days ahead. But that effort can now 
begin now that the war that has torn the country apart has finally come 
to an end.  
 
The agreement was a victory for all those in the world who believe that 
with determination a principled peace is possible. That conviction was 
shared by three brave American diplomats who gave their lives in pursuit 
of peace in Bosnia--Bob Frasure, Joe Kruzel, and Nelson Drew. We honor 
their memories here today. I'm so pleased that their families are able 
to be with us in the audience today.  
 
But the victory achieved here will not be secure unless we all get to 
work to ensure that the promise of this moment is realized. The parties 
have put their solemn commitments on paper. In the coming days and 
weeks, they'll have to put these commitments into practice, extending 
them to every mayor, every soldier, every police officer on the 
territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina.  
 
The United States and the international community will have to work hard 
to help them succeed. It is profoundly in our self-interest to do so.  
 
As we move forward, we must be both realistic and clear-eyed. We should 
not assume that the people of the former Yugoslavia have resolved all of 
their historic differences, but we should also remember that we have now 
an opportunity to put behind them the horrors of the last four years. 
The war was waged against civilians; it is they who are the real winners 
today. The American people should be proud of their help in achieving 
this result today. The war in Bosnia has been a challenge not only to 
our interests but to our values. By our leadership here, we have upheld 
both.  
 
I trust that one day we'll look back at this time and say: Dayton was 
the place where fundamental choices were made. This is the place where 
the parties chose peace over war, dialogue over destruction, reason over 
revenge; and this is where each of us has accepted the challenges to 
make the choices made here meaningful and to put them into effect so 
that they will endure.  
 
Thank you very much. Now, I would like to introduce former Prime 
Minister Carl Bildt.  
 
 
Prime Minister Bildt. Presidents, Mr. Secretary: It is easy to start a 
war but difficult to conclude a peace. What has been achieved here in 
Dayton has been achieved not without difficulty, but the important thing 
is that it has been achieved. Important as that achievement here of 
Dayton is, we must understand that it represents but the beginning of 
peace. We must all be deeply aware of the challenges and the 
difficulties in the days and the weeks and the months and the years that 
lie ahead of us. We'll meet in a short time in Paris to sign these 
agreements, and after that we will meet in London to discuss how the 
difficult parts of this comprehensive peace package can be properly and 
fully implemented.  
 
Because implementation is now the key to true peace in Bosnia and the 
region--to take Bosnia to free and fair elections during the next year; 
to let all of those who have been forced to flee to other countries or 
to inside the region, or inside Bosnia, have the possibility of 
returning to their homes, to disarm and demobilize; to start to rebuild 
a ruined economy; to secure human rights for each and everyone; to build 
that reconciliation that is the road to a future in harmony in Bosnia: 
All of this will certainly be difficult. It will also require a massive 
effort by the international community to both secure the immediate 
military implementation and to help with the decisive political, 
humanitarian, and economic implementation. It is those tasks that are 
the true keys to the real possibilities of an enduring peace.  
 
The 15 nations of the European Union have already outlined a broad and 
comprehensive program of help and assistance and support for all of 
Bosnia and for cooperation with all of the region. We are fully prepared 
to make our contribution to making this peace work, but decisive will, 
of course, be the extent to which all parties themselves are fully 
prepared to continue along the path set here in Dayton and to be 
confirmed in Paris and London.  
 
I wish to pay tribute to all those that have made the agreement here 
possible. First and foremost, of course, to the three presidents--
President Izetbegovic, President Milosevic, and President Tudjman--and 
their entire delegations. Without your common determination, without 
your statesmanship, nothing would have succeeded.  
 
Also to the American team, so ably led by Secretary Christopher and 
Assistant Secretary Holbrooke. Dick, if I might say that--on an official 
occasion like this--you did a great job. You deserve a lot of credit for 
it. You will be given that officially, but, here, a more personal 
tribute from us who have been working with you and with your entire 
impressive and very nice team as well; to the colleagues in the Contact 
Group, to all the people here at Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, 
Packey's Sports Bar--never to be forgotten--and to all of the people in 
Dayton.  
 
War is a terrible thing. Peace is difficult to build. Let the memories 
of all of the horrors of war be the force that takes us through the 
challenges of peace during the weeks, the months, the days of peace that 
are now ahead of us.  
 
 
Deputy Foreign Minister Ivanov [through interpreter, delayed audio of 
interpretation].   achieve solutions corresponding to the present 
realities and to the interests of peace.  
 
These decisions, however, will become historic only when they are 
implemented. The parties have taken upon themselves obligations and must 
strictly abide by them.  
 
Russia intends to continue to actively contribute to the peace process 
in Bosnia; in particular, with regard to the implementation of civilian 
aspects of the settlement. The decision of Russia's participation in 
fulfilling the military aspects of this agreement will be made by us 
later and will take into account all the existing conditions. In this 
regard, Russia reserves its position in regards to Annex 11(b), which 
deals with issues of military implementation.  
 
It is important that simultaneously with the adoption of the peace 
agreements, the issue of sanctions is being settled. This will 
contribute to stabilization in this region. The agreements have been 
difficult to achieve. They don't answer all the questions, but these are 
the agreements which we could reach today. It will be even more 
difficult to achieve these agreements.  
 
Russia, together with other members of the Contact Group, is ready to do 
everything necessary for the earliest achievement of the comprehensive 
peaceful settlement of Bosnia. Just now President Yeltsin made an 
address on Russian TV where he stressed that Russia would like to see 
Bosnia become a democratic, prosperous state, where all the peoples 
inhabiting it could live in peace. We shall actively contribute toward 
this goal.  
 
In conclusion, on behalf of the Russian delegation, I would like to 
express deep appreciation to the U.S. Administration for its hospitality 
and excellent working conditions. In particular, we express our 
appreciation to you Mr. Secretary of State for your personal 
contribution to the achievement of the agreement. Thank you.  
 
 
President Milosevic. Presidents, Mr. Christopher, ladies and gentlemen: 
Due to the successful conclusion of the negotiations in Dayton, this day 
will enter into the history as the date of the end of the war in the 
area of the former Yugoslavia. In a civil war like this one in Bosnia 
there are no winners, and there could be no winners; all are losers. 
Only peace is a victory.  
 
The solutions achieved here include painful concessions by all sides. 
However, without such concessions, it would be impossible to succeed 
here, and peace would be impossible. Therefore, no party should regret 
the concessions which were given. Starting with the present day, the war 
in Bosnia should be left to the past, while peace and future 
cooperation, understanding and economic and cultural development should 
enter the scene of the area. I would like to avail myself of this 
opportunity to emphasize that the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia shall 
continue with the same persistence with which it struggled for peace and 
equality of peoples in the area during the past years to promote 
cooperation and development on equal basis in the best interests of all 
countries and people in the region.  
 
Mr. Christopher, I would like to express my gratitude to the people and 
the Government of the United States of America--the President, the 
American negotiating team headed by Richard Holbrooke, and to you, 
personally, for the great efforts the United States invested in the 
achievement of peace, expressing at the same time the expectation that 
the United States shall take part in the implementation of the agreement 
in the same way as they contributed to the achievement of the agreement.  
 
I thank the representatives of the Russian Federation and the 
representatives of the European Union for their constructive 
cooperation. I would like to pay special tribute to the people of 
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base and the citizens of Dayton for their 
cordial hospitality and moral support, which they gave to the success of 
the proximity talks. Thank you.  
 
 
President Izetbegovic. Presidents, Secretary Christopher, Ambassador 
Holbrooke, ladies and gentlemen, dear friends: Today is a historic day 
for Bosnia and for the rest of the world. For Bosnia because the war, we 
hope, will be replaced by peace and for the rest of the world because 
the suffering of Bosnia and everything that followed it has been a moral 
question of the first rate--and moral questions concern every man and 
every woman in the world.  
 
The documents that we have just signed guarantee the sovereignty and 
integrity of Bosnia and Herzegovina and development of an open society 
based on tolerance and freedom. This we consider as the main and 
greatest result of the just-completed negotiations. We are thoroughly 
committed to honor and fulfill the obligations stemming from them. We 
plead to America, Europe, the Islamic world, and all the countries in 
the world to support us in this important and noble task.  
 
This support and help are especially expected from the United States of 
America--from the President of the United States, from the Congress, and 
from the American people. Don't hesitate, since by doing so you help to 
relieve the suffering of many people and to quell the fire of a 
dangerous spot that presents a constant threat to the region and to the 
world.  
 
And to my people I say, this may not be a just peace, but it is more 
just than a continuation of war. In the situation as it is and in the 
world as it is, a better peace could not have been achieved.  
 
God is our witness that we have done everything in our power so that the 
extent of injustice for our people and our country would be decreased.  
 
 
President Tudjman. Mr. Secretary of State, Mr. Co-Chairman of these 
peace talks, distinguished presidents, ladies and gentlemen: Let me 
express my satisfaction with the fact that we have finally reached a 
solution promising lasting peace in Bosnia--that is, in the former 
Yugoslavia--after five years of crisis, four years of war, and more than 
three years of intensive negotiations. The dramatic character of these 
negotiations in which the solution has been reached when everyone 
thought that the negotiations had failed also symbolizes all the 
complexity and difficulty of this crisis--certainly, the major crisis to 
affect Europe after World War II.  
 
The Republic of Croatia has done everything in order to avoid war, and, 
when it unfortunately did break out, we have spared no effort in seeking 
a peaceful settlement. At this conference, we have also contributed in 
every possible respect to achieve a solution.  
 
Thanks to the efforts of the organizers and host, as well as the other 
members of the Contact Group, we have reached an agreement which we 
believe will bring about the complete cessation of war in Bosnia and 
Herzegovina and of the crisis in the former Yugoslavia.  
 
I would like to emphasize my conviction that this agreement will result 
in further strengthening of the federation between the Croats and 
Bosniacs in accordance with the Washington agreement. In particular, we 
look forward to the peaceful integration of the remaining occupied areas 
of Croatia and to complete normalization of relations among all the 
states emerged from the former Yugoslavia and their people on the ground 
on mutual recognition. I believe that the implementation of these 
agreements will result in lasting peace and create conditions necessary 
for the establishment of a new international order in this part of the 
world.  
 
Aware of the complexity of the situations in my letter to President 
Clinton a few years ago, I expressed the opinion that only respectable 
forces such as NATO would have political and military strength needed 
for the implementation of peace. Therefore, I strongly support the 
expected arrival of NATO and U.S. forces. And I assure you that the 
Republic of Croatia will spare no effort to cooperate with them and 
provide them with all necessary assistance in fulfilling their noble 
task.  
 
For all these reasons, let me express my gratitude to the United States 
of America--President Clinton and Vice President Gore--and all member 
states of the Contact Group. In particular, I would stress your role, 
dear Mr. Christopher, and that of your co-workers, headed by Mr. 
Holbrooke, in organizing these negotiations. Thank you for your efforts, 
best evidenced by the several last working nights which, as we see, have 
resulted in this historic agreement. Thank you.  
 
 
Assistant Secretary Holbrooke. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Fourteen weeks 
ago--it seems like 14 years--President Clinton launched five of us on a 
mission to turn Bosnia from war toward peace. Within a week, we had 
suffered the greatest imaginable tragedy--the loss of three cherished 
colleagues and friends on Mt. Igman. But they are with us in spirit 
today, and we would not be here today without their efforts and their 
contribution.  
 
The agreements and territorial arrangements initialed today are a huge 
step forward, the biggest by far since the war began. But ahead lies an 
equally daunting task: implementation. On every page of the many 
complicated documents and annexes initialed here today lie challenges to 
both sides to set aside their enmities, their differences, which are 
still raw with open wounds. They must work together.  
 
On paper, we have peace. To make it work is our next and our greatest 
challenge. A challenge is, of course, also an opportunity. The Contact 
Group and many other nations will be there to help, but the peoples of 
Bosnia must do it for themselves.  
 
On a personal note, I want to thank my colleagues on our traveling team: 
Gen. Wes Clark, Roberts Owen, Chris Hill, Gen. Don Kerrick, Jim Pardew, 
Rosemary Pauli-Gikas, and the entire support team for their putting up 
with impossible hours, long separations from their family, and, if I 
understand what I read in the papers correctly, an occasionally 
impossible boss. Also, the augmented team in Dayton and the best support 
and guidance from Washington throughout--from Vice President Gore; from 
Warren Christopher, my colleague and friend for 19 years; from Bill 
Perry; Tony Lake, a colleague and friend for over 30 years; Madeleine 
Albright; John Shalikashvili; and, of course, the incredible support we 
have gotten from the people of Dayton and, above all, from the Wright-
Patterson Air Force Base, headed by General Viccellio and his team.  
 
It's been a long and winding road for all of us, and it's not over yet--
far from it. The immense difficulties and the roller-coaster ride we 
have lived through in Dayton in the last 21 days, and especially in the 
last few days, only serves to remind us how much work lies ahead. Let us 
pledge, therefore, that this day in Dayton be long-remembered as the day 
in which Bosnia and its neighbors turned from war to peace. Thank you.  
 
I'd like to ask Jacques Blot, Pauline Neville-Jones, and Wolfgang 
Ischinger--from France, the United Kingdom, and the Federal Republic of 
Germany--if they would join me, and I'd like to ask each of them to say 
a few words. Come up together, please.  
 
 
Ambassador Ischinger. Presidents, Mr. Secretary: On behalf of the German 
Government, it is my privilege to congratulate the three presidents and 
their delegations and all of the people in Bosnia and Herzegovina on the 
peace agreement reached today.   
 
After so many months of war and suffering, we move today from war to 
peace. This is a moment of joy and great relief for all of us. In 
Germany, hundreds of thousands of refugees from Bosnia are sharing this 
moment of joy with us today.   
 
My government expresses its firm support for this comprehensive 
agreement. We will actively participate in the complex tasks of 
implementation which lie ahead. In particular, we are proposing to 
launch the arms control negotiations provided for in this agreement with 
a conference to be held in Bonn in the coming weeks.  
 
Today's success can be sealed only if the entire peace package will be 
faithfully implemented by all of the parties in the weeks and months 
ahead. That is our common challenge.  
 
Today's success is also a success for the Contact Group, which has been 
able to make significant contributions to the agreement which has just 
been initialed. My special tribute goes to Carl Bildt, the negotiator of 
the European Union. Our thanks go to our American hosts--to you, Mr. 
Secretary, to Dick Holbrooke, to all the members of his very able team, 
and to the people of Dayton, Ohio, for the gracious hospitality which we 
have been offered here in Dayton for three full weeks. Thank you very 
much.  
 
 
Ambassador Blot [through interpreter]. Presidents, Mr. Secretary of 
State: With our permission, as a small contribution, I would like to 
speak French.   
 
With the contribution of all the people in Bosnia and Herzegovina who 
have suffered so much, France is very satisfied to see that the 
agreements concluded today [inaudible] have gone toward peace. We would 
like to pay tribute and the courage to all those who have chosen the--. 
. . . [audio difficulties/interpretation not broadcast.]  
 
[Interpretation, continuing]... We would like to hail your personal 
efforts, Mr. Presidents. Since the beginning of the war, France has 
spared no effort to help Bosnia and Herzegovina to find peace again. 
With other European countries, France has undertaken a number of 
actions. France participated in the actions of the Contact Group. Here, 
Mr. Secretary, in Dayton, France has given its support.   [audio 
difficulties/inaudible]  
 
[Interpretation continuing ... by their signature in the conference to 
which they are invited by the President of France in December. It is 
important that each community understands that without cooperation, 
nothing will be realized. Very quickly it will be also necessary to take 
action to help ensure that each community, especially in Sarajevo, will 
be assured that its security has become real.  
 
France will bring its contribution to the implementation of the 
agreements reached in Dayton and to be signed in Paris in the military 
field, where its forces will participate at the NATO operations or with 
its partners at the European Union for the civilian aspects of it. And 
France [audio difficulties] to do everything that will ensure the 
identity of a united political, cultural, democratic Bosnia and 
Herzegovina which will, like all the other states of the former 
Yugoslavia, find its place in Europe.  
 
Ms. Pauline Neville-Jones. Mr. Secretary, Presidents, ladies and 
gentlemen: I'd like to add my thanks to those of the previous speakers 
for the generous hospitality shown us here by the base commander and 
also by the people of Dayton. We have been made to feel very welcome for 
the important work that we've carried out here.  
 
I would also like to congratulate the presidents for having signed and 
the United States Administration for the energy and the determination 
that has been shown in leading these talks to success. Everybody who's 
been involved in them knows that they were not easy.  
 
I think this positive outcome demonstrates the importance of the Contact 
Group process. Dick (Holbrooke), with whom other members of the Contact 
Group have been working closely for a long time, I'd like to thank you 
personally for the contribution that you have made. I think everybody 
knows how important it's been. It's been a privilege, Mr. Secretary, to 
work with your colleague.  
 
This agreement is a landmark in the history of Bosnia, and if it is 
implemented, it will open the way to a prosperous and secure future for 
the people of that country in both entities. It is a huge opportunity, 
but it does depend upon implementation. These agreements are not self-
implementing.   
 
We look to the Bosnian parties to comply with their obligations. They 
know that, for they have undertaken to cooperate with the international 
community actively. We welcome that, and we want to help because the 
opportunity there is to restore this country to normality and to set it 
on a new path. It is at the end of the day only the people of Bosnia who 
can achieve that outcome.  
 
I'd like to say on behalf of the United Kingdom that we will play a full 
part in that process. We shall play, for one thing, a central role in 
the NATO-led international implementation force that I hope will shortly 
be able to deploy. We, as you know, already have troops in Bosnia and 
Herzegovina. We have, indeed, suffered loss of life. We want to make 
good on that investment with the help of the people of Bosnia.  
 
My government will also contribute to reconstruction and to development. 
We want to develop a direct and dynamic relationship between Bosnia and 
the European Union, and we will do that with our European partners.  
 
I'd just like to say in conclusion that the British Government will host 
a conference at ministerial level in London, probably on 8-9 December, 
concerned with the implementation of the peace settlement that has been 
initialed today. We shall do that in the presence of Bosnian 
representatives. The object will be to get agreement in the 
international community on the future program for implementation of the 
civilian aspects of the Dayton Agreement.   
 
Mr. Secretary, Presidents, ladies and gentlemen: I just want to say one 
other thing, which is that, for me personally, this has been a very 
great privilege to have been able to make some small contribution to the 
conclusion of this important settlement that was initialed today. Thank 
you.  
 
 
Assistant Secretary Holbrooke. Mr. Secretary, in your name and on behalf 
of the President of the United States, the people of Dayton and this air 
base, we're about to close the proceedings. Before we do, I wonder if we 
could ask the three presidents to stand up and for us to join them 
standing and express our appreciation for what they've done in Dayton 
and our hopes for the future.  
 
 
Secretary Christopher. Ladies and gentlemen, the next step in this 
important process will be a peace conference to be held in Paris some 
time in mid-December. That will be an important formal step in this 
process that was launched here today by the initialing of these 
agreements.  
 
We appreciate all of your attendance here today to help us mark this 
important occasion. Thank you very much for coming, and now the meeting 
is adjourned.  
 
(###) 
 
 
 
ARTICLE 5: 
 
The Dayton Peace Agreement: Building Peace With Justice 
Secretary Christopher 
Remarks at the initialing of the Dayton Peace Agreement, Wright-
Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio, November 21, 1995 
 
President Izetbegovic, President Milosevic, President Tudjman, Mr. 
Bildt, Deputy Minister Ivanov, General Shalikashvili, Deputy Secretary 
White, honored colleagues and guests: We have reached a day many 
believed would never come. After three weeks of intensive negotiations 
in Dayton, the leaders of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, and Serbia 
have agreed to end the war in the former Yugoslavia. They have agreed 
that four years of destruction is enough. The time has come to build 
peace with justice. 
 
Today's agreement would not have come without the vision and leadership 
of President Clinton. The diplomatic and military strategy that he 
launched this summer has borne fruit. I am gratified at the result and 
determined to see that it is implemented. 
 
We have come to this hopeful moment because the parties made the 
fundamental choices that lasting peace will require. And we are here 
because our international negotiating team successfully led the parties 
to agreement. Assistant Secretary Holbrooke and his team took on a hard, 
exhausting task and succeeded in a way that will long be remembered and 
admired. I also want to recognize the tireless efforts of my friend and 
colleague, National Security Adviser Tony Lake. The European Union and 
the members of the Contact Group--Germany, France, the United Kingdom, 
and Russia--were with us every critical step of the way. 
 
No one thought these negotiations would be easy, and all of us on this 
stage can tell you they were not. What we wanted was a comprehensive 
settlement, and that is what we have achieved. The hard-won commitments 
we will initial today address the wrenching and fundamental issues over 
which the war was fought. 
 
Today's agreement assures the continuity of a single state of Bosnia and 
Herzegovina, with effective federal institutions, a single currency, and 
full respect by its neighbors for its sovereignty. The city of Sarajevo, 
which has gripped the world's attention for the last four years, will no 
longer be divided. It will be reunified under the Federation of Bosnia 
and Herzegovina. Checkpoints and closed bridges will no longer divide 
its families. All Bosnia's people will have the right to move freely 
throughout the country. Refugees and displaced persons will have the 
right to return home or to obtain just compensation. Free and democratic 
elections will be held next year 
 
The agreement contains strong human rights protections. It confirms the 
parties' obligation to cooperate fully in the investigation and 
prosecution of war crimes. It excludes indicted war criminals from 
military or government office. 
 
The agreement requires the parties to withdraw their forces to agreed 
positions and provides for important confidence-building measures among 
them. The parties have pledged to cooperate fully with a NATO-led peace 
implementation force and to ensure the safety of its personnel. And it 
sets the stage for a comprehensive program of economic reconstruction. 
 
Today's agreement certainly does not erase memories of what has come 
before or guarantee that the fabric of Bosnia's society will easily be 
restored. But still, it is a victory for us all. The agreement is a 
victory for people of every heritage in the former Yugoslavia. It offers 
tangible hope that there will be no more days of dodging bullets, no 
more winters of freshly dug graves, and no more years of isolation from 
the outside world. 
 
The agreement is a victory for all those who believe in a multi-ethnic 
democracy in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Securing that goal will require an 
immense effort in the days ahead. But that effort can now begin as the 
war that has torn Bosnia apart finally comes to an end. 
 
The agreement is a victory for all those in the world who believed that 
with determination, a principled peace is possible. That conviction was 
shared by the three brave American diplomats who gave their lives in 
pursuit of peace in Bosnia--Bob Frasure, Joe Kruzel, and Nelson Drew. We 
honor their memories. I am so pleased that their families are with us 
today. 
 
But this victory will not be secure unless we all get to work to ensure 
that the promise of this moment is realized. The parties have put a 
solemn set of commitments on paper. In the coming days and weeks, they 
will have to put them into practice--extending them to every mayor, 
every soldier, every police officer in their territory. The United 
States and the international community will continue to help them 
succeed. It is profoundly in our self-interest to do so. 
 
As we move forward, we must be realistic and clear-eyed. We should not 
assume that the people of the former Yugoslavia have resolved all their 
differences. But we should also remember that we can now begin to leave 
behind the horrors of the last four years. This war was waged against 
civilians; it is they who are the real winners today. The American 
people should be proud of that achievement. The war in Bosnia has been a 
challenge to our interests and our values. By our leadership here, we 
have upheld both. 
 
I trust that one day, people will  look back on Dayton and say: This is 
the place where the fundamental choices were made; this is where the 
parties chose peace over war, dialogue over  destruction, and reason 
over revenge; this is where each of us accepted the challenge to make 
those choices meaningful and to make them endure. Thank you.   
 
 
[Box Item]

Culmination of Intense Diplomatic Negotiations 
Remarks to the press by Secretary Christopher following the initialing 
of the Dayton Peace Agreement, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, 
Ohio, November 21, 1995. 
 
Good afternoon again. Today's event, obviously, marks the culmination of 
a diplomatic process that has gone on for several weeks--indeed, several 
months. I marked the beginning of it about the time of the London 
Conference. 
 
We pursued the diplomatic initiative very aggressively after that. Tony 
Lake's trip to the capitals of Europe, followed by NATO action to 
determine that there would be decisive air action if there were further 
attacks on safe areas; the attack on Sarajevo responded to by a very 
strong air campaign; shuttle diplomacy then commenced by Ambassador 
Holbrooke and the American team, aided by the Contact Group and others. 
That is what has brought us to today. 
 
Throughout this period, we followed a series of principles, and I think 
you will find them reflected in the agreement--throughout the agreement-
-when you have an opportunity to study it more fully. 
 
First, there should be a single Bosnian state, with a single 
international personality, and a commitment to its internationally 
recognized borders; a federal government representing all the people of 
Bosnia with foreign policy powers and other national government powers; 
democratic elections to be held next year; and strong guarantees of 
human rights. 
 
Finally, let me say that diplomacy is about more than technicalities and 
paper. Diplomacy is about people. We ought to concentrate on the fact 
that there will be a different kind of winter in Sarajevo this winter--a 
different kind of winter in Bosnia. The starving and suffering, the 
hunger, the cold, the freezing--those, we hope, are things of the past. 
This agreement determines that that can be made a thing of the past. 
 
There will be considerable national debate commencing in the United 
States. It is important that the people of America remember the stark, 
terrible images of the last four years of people dying and freezing, 
people hungry, people in camps. Those are the things that we should have 
in our mind when we engage on this national debate which will determine 
whether the United States continues to play its leadership role in the 
world.    
 
[End Box Item] 
 
 
(###) 
 
 
 
ARTICLE 6: 
 
Agreement Reached on Peace In the Balkans 
President Clinton 
Statement in the White House Rose Garden, Washington, DC, November 21, 
1995 
 
Good morning. About an hour ago, I spoke with Secretary Christopher in 
Dayton, Ohio. He informed me that the Presidents  
of Bosnia, Croatia, and Serbia have reached a peace agreement to end the 
war in Bosnia--to end the worst conflict in Europe since World War II. 
 
After nearly four years of 250,000 people killed, 2 million refugees,  
and atrocities that have appalled people all over the world, the people 
of Bosnia finally have a chance to turn from the horror of war to the 
promise of peace. 
 
The Presidents of Bosnia, Croatia, and Serbia have made a historic and 
heroic choice. They have heeded the will of their people. Whatever their 
ethnic group, the overwhelming majority of Bosnia citizens and the 
citizens of Croatia and Serbia want the same thing. They want to stop 
the slaughter; they want to put an end to the violence and war; they 
want to give their children and their grandchildren a chance to lead a 
normal life. Today, thank God, the voices of those people have been 
heard. 
 
I want to congratulate America's negotiating team, led by Secretary 
Christopher and Ambassador Holbrooke, for their extraordinary service. 
Their determination, along with that of our European and Russian 
partners, along with NATO's resolve, brought the parties to the 
negotiating table. Then their single-minded pursuit of peace in Dayton 
made today's agreement a possibility and, eventually, a reality. 
 
The people of Bosnia, the American people, indeed, people throughout the 
world should be very thankful for this event today. The peace plan 
agreed to would preserve Bosnia as a single state within its present 
borders and with international recognition. The state will be made up of 
two parts--the Bosnian Croat Federation and the Bosnian Serb Republic--
with a fair distribution of land between the two. The capital city of 
Sarajevo will remain united. 
 
There will be an effective central government, including a national 
parliament; a presidency; and a constitutional court, with 
responsibility for foreign policy, foreign trade, monetary policy, 
citizenship, immigration, and other important functions. 
 
The presidency and the parliament will be chosen through free democratic 
elections, held under international supervision. Refugees will be 
allowed to return to their homes, people will be able to move freely 
throughout Bosnia, and the human rights of every Bosnian citizen will be 
monitored by an independent commission and an internationally trained 
civilian police. Those individuals charged with war crimes will be 
excluded from political life. 
 
Now that the parties to the war have made a serious commitment to peace, 
we must help them to make it work. All the parties have asked for a 
strong international force to supervise the separation of forces and to 
give them confidence that each side will live up to their agreements. 
Only NATO can do that job, and the United States as NATO's leader must 
play an essential role in this mission. Without us, the hard-won peace 
would be lost, the war would resume, the slaughter of innocents would 
begin again--and the conflict that already has claimed so many people 
could spread like poison throughout the entire region. 
 
We are at a decisive moment. The parties have chosen peace. America must 
choose peace as well. Now that a detailed settlement has been reached, 
NATO will rapidly complete its planning for the implementation force 
known as IFOR. The plan soon will be submitted to me for review and for 
approval. As of now, we expect that about one-third of IFOR's force will 
be American. The rest will come from our NATO partners and from other 
nations throughout the world. 
 
At the same time, once the agreement is signed, the international 
community will initiate a parallel program to provide humanitarian 
relief, to begin the job of rebuilding, to help the thousands of 
refugees return to their homes, to monitor free elections--in short, to 
help the Bosnian people create the conditions of lasting peace. 
 
The NATO military mission will be clear and limited. Our troops will 
take their orders only from the American general who commands NATO. They 
will have authority to meet any threat to their safety or any violation 
of the peace agreement with immediate and decisive force. And there will 
be a reasonable timetable for their withdrawal. 
 
I am satisfied that the NATO implementation plan is clear, limited, and 
achievable and that the risks to our troops are minimized. I will 
promptly consult with Congress when  I receive this plan, and, if I am 
fully satisfied with it when I see it in its final form, I will ask 
Congress to support American participation. 
 
The central fact for us as Americans is this: Our leadership made this 
peace agreement possible and helped to bring an end to the senseless 
slaughter of so many innocent people that our fellow citizens had to 
watch night after night after night for four long years on their 
television screens. Now American leadership--together with our allies--
is needed to make this peace real and enduring. Our values, our 
interests, and our leadership all over the world are at stake. 
 
I ask all Americans during this Thanksgiving week to take some time to 
say a simple prayer of thanksgiving that this peace has been reached, 
that our nation was able to play an important role in stopping the 
suffering and the slaughter. May God bless the peace and the United 
States. 
 
(###) 
 
 
 
ARTICLE 7: 
 
U.S. Support for Implementing  The Bosnian Peace Agreement   
President Clinton 
Address to the nation, Washington, DC, November 27, 1995 
 
Good evening. Last week, the warring factions in Bosnia reached a peace 
agreement as a result of our efforts in Dayton, Ohio, and the support of 
our European and Russian partners. Tonight, I want to speak with you 
about implementing   the Bosnian peace agreement and why our values and 
interests as Americans require that we participate. 
 
Let me say at the outset that America's role will not be about fighting 
a war; it will be about helping the people of Bosnia to secure their own 
peace agreement. Our mission   will be limited, focused, and under the 
command of an American general. 
 
In fulfilling this mission, we will have the chance to help stop the 
killing of innocent civilians, especially children, and, at the same 
time, to bring stability to Central Europe, a region of the world that 
is vital to our national interests. It is the right thing to do. 
 
From our birth, America has always been more than just a place. America 
has embodied an idea that has become the ideal for billions of people 
throughout the world. Our founders said it best: America is about life, 
liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  
 
In this century especially, America has done more than simply stand for 
these ideals. We have acted on them and sacrificed for them. Our people 
fought two world wars so that freedom could triumph over tyranny. After 
World War I, we pulled back from the world, leaving a vacuum that was 
filled by the forces of hatred. After World War II, we continued to lead 
the world. We made the commitments that kept the peace, that helped to 
spread democracy, that created unparalleled prosperity, and that brought 
victory in the Cold War. 
 
Today, because of our dedication, America's ideals--liberty, democracy, 
and peace--are more and more the aspirations of people everywhere in the 
world. It is the power of our ideas--even more than our size, our 
wealth, and our military might--that makes America a uniquely trusted 
nation. 
 
With the Cold War over, some people now question the need for our 
continued active leadership in the world. They believe that, much like 
after World War I, America can now step back from the responsibilities 
of leadership. They argue that to be secure, we need only to keep our 
own borders safe and that the time has come now to leave to others the 
hard work of leadership beyond our borders; I strongly disagree. 
 
As the Cold War gives way to the global village, our leadership is 
needed more than ever, because problems that start beyond our borders 
can quickly become problems within them. We are all vulnerable to the 
organized forces   of intolerance and destruction; terrorism; ethnic, 
religious, and regional rivalries; the spread of organized crime; 
weapons of mass destruction; and drug trafficking. Just as surely as 
fascism and communism, these forces also threaten freedom and democracy, 
peace and prosperity. And they, too, demand American leadership.  
 
Nowhere has the argument for our leadership been more clearly justified 
than in the struggle to stop or prevent war and civil violence. From 
Iraq to Haiti, from South Africa to Korea, from the Middle East to 
Northern Ireland,   we have stood up for peace and freedom because it is 
in our interest to do so, and because it is the right thing to do. 
 
Now, that doesn't mean we can solve every problem. My duty as President 
is to match the demands for American leadership to our strategic 
interest and to our ability to make a difference. America cannot and 
must not be the world's policeman. We cannot stop all war for all time, 
but we can stop some wars. We cannot save all women and all children, 
but we can save many of them. We can't do everything, but we must do 
what we can. 
 
There are times and places where our leadership can mean the difference 
between peace and war and where we can defend our fundamental values as   
a people and serve our most basic, strategic interests. My fellow 
Americans, in this new era there are still times when America and 
America alone can and should make the difference for peace. The terrible 
war in Bosnia is such a case. Nowhere today is the need for American 
leadership more stark or more immediate than in Bosnia. 
 
For nearly four years, a terrible war has torn Bosnia apart. Horrors we 
prayed had been banished from Europe forever have been seared into our 
minds again. Skeletal prisoners caged behind barbed-wire fences; women    
and girls raped as a tool of war; defenseless men and boys shot down 
into mass graves, evoking visions of World War II concentration camps; 
and endless lines of refugees marching toward a future of despair. 
 
When I took office, some were urging immediate intervention in the 
conflict. I decided that American ground troops should not fight a war 
in Bosnia because the United States could not force peace on Bosnia's 
warring ethnic groups--the Serbs, Croats, and Muslims. Instead, America 
has worked with our European allies in searching for peace, stopping the 
war from spreading, and easing the suffering of the Bosnian people. 
 
We imposed tough economic sanctions on Serbia. We used our air power to 
conduct the longest humanitarian airlift in history and to enforce a no-
fly zone that took the war out of   the skies. We helped to make peace 
between two of the three warring parties--the Muslims and the Croats. 
But as the months of war turned into years, it became clear that Europe 
alone could not end the conflict. 
 
This summer, Bosnian Serb shelling once again turned Bosnia's play-
grounds and marketplaces into killing fields. In response, the United 
States led NATO's heavy and continuous air strikes, many of them flown 
by skilled and brave American pilots. Those air strikes--together with 
the renewed determination of our European partners and the Bosnian and 
Croat gains on the battlefield--convinced the Serbs, finally, to start 
thinking about making peace. 
 
At the same time, the United States initiated an intensive diplomatic 
effort that forged a Bosnia-wide cease-fire and got the parties to agree 
to the basic principles of peace. Three dedicated American diplomats--
Bob Frasure, Joe Kruzel, and Nelson Drew--lost their lives in that 
effort. Tonight, we remember their sacrifice and that of their families. 
And we will never forget their exceptional service to our nation. 
 
Finally, just three weeks ago, the Muslims, Croats, and Serbs came to 
Dayton, Ohio, in America's heartland, to negotiate a settlement. There, 
exhausted by war, they made a commitment to peace. They agreed to put 
down their guns; to preserve Bosnia as a single state; to investigate 
and prosecute war criminals; to protect the human rights of all 
citizens; to try to build a peaceful, democratic future. And they asked 
for America's help as they implement this peace agreement.  
 
America has a responsibility to answer that request; to help to turn 
this moment of hope into an enduring reality. To do that, troops from 
our country and around the world would go into Bosnia to give them the 
confidence and support they need to implement their peace plan. I refuse 
to send American troops to fight a war in Bosnia, but I believe we must 
help to secure the Bosnian peace. I want you to know tonight what is at 
stake, exactly what our troops will be asked to accomplish, and why we 
must carry out our responsibility to help implement the peace agreement.  
 
Implementing the agreement in Bosnia can end the terrible suffering of 
the people--the warfare, the mass executions, the ethnic cleansing, the 
campaigns of rape and terror. Let us never forget that a quarter of a 
million men, women, and children have been shelled, shot, and tortured 
to death. Two million people--half of the population--were forced from 
their homes and into a miserable life as refugees. And these faceless 
numbers hide millions of real personal tragedies; for each of the war's 
victims was a mother or daughter, a father or son, a brother or sister.  
 
Now the war is over. American leadership created the chance to build a 
peace and stop the suffering. Securing peace in Bosnia will also help to 
build a free and stable Europe. Bosnia lies at the very heart of Europe, 
next-door to many of its fragile new democracies and some of our closest 
allies. Generations of Americans have understood that Europe's freedom 
and Europe's stability is vital to our own national security. That's why 
we fought two wars in Europe; that's why we launched the Marshall Plan 
to restore Europe; that's why we created NATO and waged the Cold War; 
and that's why we must help the nations of Europe to end their worst 
nightmare since World War II--now. 
 
The only force capable of getting this job done is NATO--the powerful, 
military alliance of democracies that has guaranteed our security for 
half a  century now. And as NATO's leader and the primary broker of the 
peace agreement, the United States must be an essential part of the 
mission. If we're not there, NATO will not be there. The peace will 
collapse; the war will reignite; and the slaughter of innocents will 
begin again. A conflict that already has claimed so many victims could 
spread like poison throughout the region, eat away at Europe's 
stability, and erode our partnership with our European allies.  
 
America's commitment to leadership will be questioned if we refuse to 
participate in implementing a peace agreement that we brokered right 
here in the United States, especially since the presidents of Bosnia, 
Croatia, and Serbia all asked us to participate and all pledged their 
best efforts to the security of our troops. 
 
When America's partnerships are weak and our leadership is in doubt, it 
undermines our ability to secure our interests and to convince others to 
work with us. If we do maintain our partnerships and our leadership, we 
need not act alone. As we saw in the Gulf war and in Haiti, many other 
nations who share our goals will also share our burdens. But when 
America does not lead, the consequences can be very grave, not only for 
others, but eventually for us as well. 
 
As I speak to you, NATO is completing its planning for IFOR, an 
international force for peace in Bosnia of about 60,000 troops. Already, 
more than 25 other nations, including our major NATO allies, have 
pledged to take part. They will contribute about two-thirds of the total 
implementation force, some 40,000 troops. The United States would 
contribute the rest, about 20,000 soldiers. 
 
Later this week, the final NATO plan will be submitted to me for review 
and approval. Let me make clear what I expect it to include, and what it 
must include, for me to give final approval to the participation of our 
armed forces. 
 
First, the mission will be precisely defined with clear, realistic goals 
that can be achieved in a definite period of time. Our troops will make 
sure that each side withdraws its forces behind the front lines and 
keeps them there. They will maintain the cease-fire to prevent the war 
from accidentally starting again. These efforts, in turn, will help to 
create a secure environment, so that the people of Bosnia can return to 
their homes, vote in free elections, and begin to rebuild their lives. 
Our Joint Chiefs of Staff have concluded that this mission should and 
will take about one year. 
 
Second, the risks to our troops will be minimized. American troops will 
take their orders from the American general who commands NATO. They will 
be heavily armed and thoroughly trained. By making an overwhelming show 
of force, they will lessen the need to use force. But unlike the UN 
forces, they will have the authority to respond immediately and the 
training and the equipment to respond with overwhelming force to any 
threat to their own safety or any violations of the military provisions 
of the peace agreement.  
 
If the NATO plan meets with my approval, I will immediately send it to 
Congress and request its support. I will also authorize the 
participation of a small number of American troops in a NATO advance 
mission that will lay the groundwork for IFOR, starting sometime next 
week. They will establish headquarters and set up the sophisticated 
communication systems that must be in place before NATO can send in its 
troops, tanks, and trucks to Bosnia. 
 
The implementation force itself would begin deploying in Bosnia in the 
days following the formal signature of the peace agreement in mid-
December. The international community will help to implement arms 
control provisions of the agreement so that future hostilities are less 
likely and armaments are limited, while the world community--the United 
States and others--will also make sure that the Bosnian Federation has 
the means to defend itself once IFOR withdraws. IFOR will not be a part 
of this effort. 
 
Civilian agencies from around the world will begin a separate program of 
humanitarian relief and reconstruction, principally paid for by our 
European allies and other interested countries. This effort is also 
absolutely essential to making the peace endure. It will bring the 
people of Bosnia the food, shelter, clothing, and medicine so many have 
been denied for so long. It will help them to rebuild--to rebuild their 
roads and schools, their power plants and hospitals, their factories and 
shops. It will reunite children with their parents and families with 
their homes. It will allow the Bosnians to freely choose their own 
leaders. It will give all the people of Bosnia a much greater stake in 
peace than war, so that peace takes on a life and a logic of its own.  
 
In Bosnia, we can and will succeed because our mission is clear and 
limited and our troops are strong and very well-prepared. But, my fellow 
Americans, no deployment of American troops is risk-free, and this one 
may well involve casualties. There may be accidents in the field or 
incidents with people who have not given up their hatred. I will take 
every measure possible to minimize these risks, but we must be prepared 
for that possibility. 
 
As President, my most difficult duty is to put the men and women who 
volunteer to serve our nation in harm's way when our interests and 
values demand it. I assume full responsibility for any harm that may 
come to them. But anyone contemplating any action that would endanger 
our troops should know this: America protects its own. Anyone--anyone--
who takes on our troops will suffer the consequences. We will fight fire 
with fire--and then some. 
 
After so much bloodshed and loss, after so many outrageous acts of 
inhuman brutality, it will take an extraordinary effort of will for the 
people of Bosnia to pull themselves from their past and start building a 
future of peace. But with our leadership and the commitment of our 
allies, the people of Bosnia can have the chance to decide their future 
in peace. They have a chance to remind the world that just a few short 
years ago, the mosques and churches of Sarajevo were a shining symbol of 
multi-ethnic tolerance; that Bosnia once found unity in its diversity. 
Indeed, the cemetery in the center of the city was just a few short 
years ago a magnificent stadium which hosted the Olympics--our universal 
symbol of peace and harmony. Bosnia can be that kind of place again. We 
must not turn our backs on Bosnia now. 
 
And so I ask all Americans, and I ask every Member of Congress--   
Democrat and Republican alike--to make the choice for peace. In the 
choice between peace and war, America must choose peace. 
 
My fellow Americans, I ask you to think just for a moment about this 
century that is drawing to a close and the new one that will soon begin. 
Because previous generations of Americans stood up for freedom and 
because we continue to do so, the American people are more secure and 
more prosperous. All around the world, more people than ever before live 
in freedom; more people than ever before are treated with dignity; more 
people than ever before can hope to build a better life. That is what 
America's leadership is all about. 
 
We know that these are the blessings of freedom, and America has always 
been freedom's greatest champion. If we continue to do everything we can 
to share these blessings with people around the world, if we continue to 
be leaders for peace, then the next century can be the greatest time our 
nation has ever known. 
 
A few weeks ago, I was privileged to spend some time with His Holiness, 
Pope John Paul, II, when he came to America. At the very end of our 
meeting, the Pope looked at me and said,: 
 
"I have lived through most of this century. The 20th century began with 
a war in Sarajevo. Mr. President, you must not let it end with a war in 
Sarajevo." 
 
In Bosnia, this terrible war has challenged our interests and troubled 
our souls. Thankfully, we can do something about it. I say again, our 
mission will be clear, limited, and achievable. The people of Bosnia, 
our NATO allies, and people all around the world are now looking to 
America for leadership. So let us lead. That is our responsibility as 
Americans. Goodnight, and God bless America.   
 
(###) 
 
 
 
ARTICLE 8: 
 
Peace in Bosnia: A Dividend Of American Leadership 
President Clinton 
Remarks to the Committee for American Leadership in Bosnia, Washington, 
DC, December 6, 1995 
 
I want to welcome this distinguished group of Americans to the White 
House. Each of you has worked very hard throughout your career to 
preserve and to project America's leadership around the world. Today you 
have joined across partisan lines to make a strong case for America's 
leadership in Bosnia, and I thank you for that. 
 
I welcome the support that you and others, including Presidents Bush and 
Ford, have shown for our troops and our efforts to secure peace in 
Bosnia. All of you represent a spirit that has helped keep our country 
strong. Regardless of party or political differences, you've stood up 
for America's leadership on behalf of our interests and our values.  
 
Many of you have been working for peace in Bosnia since that terrible 
war began. Now that the Balkan leaders have made a commitment to peace, 
you know that we must help that peace take hold. You understand the 
importance of our action and the costs of our failure to act--something, 
I might add, that has been under-discussed in the public arena in the 
last few weeks. Our conscience demands that we seize this chance to end 
the suffering, but our national security interests are deeply engaged as 
well. 
 
Europe's security is still inextricably tied to America's. We need a 
strong Europe as a strong partner on problems from terrorism to the 
spread of weapons of mass destruction. Europe's stability is threatened 
as long as this war burns at its center. We have to stand with the 
Europeans on Bosnia if we're going to stand with them--and if we expect 
them to stand with us--on the whole range of other issues we clearly are 
going to face together in the years ahead. 
 
Our engagement in Bosnia is also essential for the continued viability 
of NATO. All the parties there--all the parties--asked for NATO's help 
in securing this peace. If we're going to be NATO's leader, we have to 
be part of this mission. If we turn our backs on Bosnia now, our allies 
will do the same; the peace will fail, the conflict could spread, the 
slaughter will certainly resume. NATO would be shaken to its core. Its 
ability to shape a stable, undivided Europe would be thrown into doubt, 
and our leadership in Europe and around the world would pay a terrible, 
terrible price. 
 
For 50 years, the bipartisan consensus for our leadership in the world 
has been a source of America's progress and strength. At the dawn of the 
post-Cold War era, that consensus is being questioned. But I believe 
that vision and unity are still called for. 
 
During my recent trip to Europe, everywhere I went and every person with 
whom I talked--from people on the street to prime ministers--said the 
very same thing: American leadership matters. American leadership is 
welcome. American leadership is necessary. But leadership is not a 
spectator sport. In Bosnia, our leadership can make a difference between 
peace and war. It demands our participation. 
 
I have to tell you that I knew how the European leaders felt, and I 
thought I knew how the people in the street felt. But the personal 
expression of support for America's willingness to help broker this 
peace agreement in Dayton and then to participate in the peace mission 
in Bosnia was more intense, more persistent, and more urgent than I had 
imagined--from the Prime Minister of Great Britain to the Prime Minister 
of Germany, to the Prime Minister of Spain, to the Prime Minister of 
Ireland, everyone else I talked to. This is a very, very, very important 
thing in terms of our relationships with Europe and what we expect in 
terms of a partnership with Europe in the years ahead. 
 
Let me say to those of you who come here from both parties: I understand 
that bipartisanship in foreign policy has never meant agreement on every 
detail of every policy. And while we may differ from time to time on the 
specifics of our policies, we still must agree--and we have never 
fundamentally disagreed on purpose--to defend our interests, to preserve 
peace, to protect human rights, to promote prosperity around the world. 
 
That does not mean that we can solve every problem; we cannot be the 
world's policeman. But when our leadership can make a difference between 
war and peace and when our interests are engaged, we have a duty to act. 
We have seen the dividends from the Persian Gulf to the Middle East, 
from North Korea to Northern Ireland to Haiti. American leadership can 
also produce those dividends and more in Bosnia, because we can make a 
difference there. 
 
I'm convinced that this mission is clear, and it's achievable. Our 
troops will have strong rules of engagement: They will operate under an 
American general; they will be fully trained and heavily armed. Our 
commanders have done all they can to minimize the risks and to maximize 
their ability to carry out a clearly defined mission with a clear end 
point. There will be no "mission creep." 
 
The peace agreement has given these parties a real opportunity to have a 
peaceful future. But they can't do it alone, and they're looking to us 
to help.  
 
America is seen by all of them as an honest broker and a fair player. 
Each of you has played a role in creating that image, and I want to 
thank you for that as much as anything else. The thing that has 
constantly impressed me as I have dealt with people all around the world 
is that people believe we are a nation with no bad motives for them or 
their future.  
 
That is what has made this moment possible in Bosnia, and that is what 
has also imposed upon us our responsibilities at this moment. For all 
that you have done to bring that about and for your support today, I 
thank you very, very much.  
 
(###) 
 
 
 
ARTICLE 9: 
 
Turning From the Horror of War to the Promise of Peace in the Balkans 
President Clinton 
Remarks at the signing of the General Agreement on the Framework for  
Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Paris, France, December 14, 1995 
 
President Chirac, President Izetbegovic, President Tudjman, President 
Milosevic, Secretary General Boutros-Ghali, Secretary General Solana, 
Representative Bildt, Prime Minister Filali, Prime Minister 
Chernomyrdin, Prime Minister Major, Prime Minister Gonzales, Chancellor 
Kohl: Let me begin, on behalf of the people of the United States, by 
thanking all of those whose labor and wisdom helped keep hope alive 
during the long, dark years of war--the humanitarian relief workers, the 
United Nations forces from Europe and beyond. Had it not been for their 
dedication and their sacrifice, the toll of the war in Bosnia would have 
been even greater. 
 
And I thank those whose work helped make this moment of peace possible, 
beginning with our host, Prime Minister Chirac, for his vigor and 
determination; Prime Minister Major, who was a full partner in the 
development of the rapid reaction force and our NATO cooperation; and 
our friend, Chancellor Kohl, who has taken in so many of the refugees 
and who now is sending German troops beyond his borders in this 
historic, common endeavor. I thank the leaders of the strong NATO and 
the determined negotiating team of Russians, Europeans, and Americans. 
 
All of you have brought us to this bright, new day, when Bosnia turns 
from the horror of war to the promise of peace. President Izetbegovic, 
President Tudjman, President Milosevic: By making peace, you have 
answered the call of your people. You have heard them say, "Stop the 
war, end the suffering, give our children the blessings of a normal 
life." 
 
In this chorus for peace today we also hear the hallowed voices of the 
victims--the children whose playgrounds were shelled in the killing 
fields, the young girls brutalized by rape, the men shot down in mass 
graves, those who starved in the camps, those who died in battle, the 
millions taken from their homes and torn from their families. Even from 
beyond the grave, there are victims singing the song of peace today. May 
their voices be in our minds and hearts forever. 
 
In Dayton, these three Balkan leaders made the fateful choice for peace. 
Today, Mr. Presidents, you have bound yourselves to peace, but tomorrow, 
you must turn the pages of this agreement into a real-life future of 
hope for those who have survived this horrible war. At your request, the 
United States and more than 25 other nations will send you our most 
precious resource--the men and women of our armed forces. Their mission: 
to allow the Bosnian people to emerge from a nightmare of fear into a 
new day of security, according to terms you have approved in a manner 
that is evenhanded and fair to all. 
 
The international community will work with you to change the face of 
Bosnia: to meet human needs; to repair and to rebuild; to reunite 
children with their families and refugees with their homes; to oversee 
democratic elections, advance human rights, and call to account those 
accused of war crimes. 
 
We can do all these things, but we cannot guarantee the future of 
Bosnia. No one outside can guarantee that Muslims, Croats, and Serbs in 
Bosnia will come together and stay together as free citizens in a united 
country sharing a common destiny. Only the Bosnian people can do that. 
 
I know that the losses have been staggering, that the scars are deep. We 
feel even today that the wounds have not healed. But Bosnia must find a 
way, with God's grace, to lay down the hatreds, to give up the revenge, 
to go forward together. That is the road--indeed, that is the only road-
-to the future. 
 
We see, from Northern Ireland to the Middle East, from South Africa to 
Haiti, people turning from hatred to hope. Here in Europe, countries 
that for centuries fought now work together for peace. Soon the Bosnian 
people will see for themselves the awesome potential of people to turn 
from conflict to cooperation. In just a few days, troops from all over 
Europe and North America and elsewhere--troops from Great Britain, 
France, and Germany; troops from Greece and Turkey; troops from Poland 
and Lithuania; and troops from the United States and Russia, former 
enemies, now friends--will answer the same call and share the same 
responsibilities to achieve the same goal--a lasting peace in Bosnia 
where enemies can become friends. 
 
Why would they do this? Because their hearts are broken by the suffering 
and the slaughter; because their minds recoil at the prospect of a 
needless, spreading war in the heart of Europe. But they--we--do so in 
the face of skeptics who say the people of the Balkans cannot escape 
their bloody past, that Balkan hearts are too hard for peace. 
 
But let us remember this war did violence not only to Bosnia's people 
but also to Bosnia's history, for Bosnia once found unity in its 
diversity. Generations of Muslims, Orthodox Catholics, and Jews lived 
side by side and enriched the world by their example. They built schools 
and libraries and wondrous places of worship. Part of the population 
laid down their tools on Friday, part on Saturday, and part on Sunday. 
But their lives were woven together by marriage and culture, work, a 
common language, and a shared pride in a place that then they all called 
home. Now, if that past is any guide, this peace can take hold. And if 
the people of Bosnia want a decent future for their children, this peace 
must take hold. 
 
Here in this City of Light, at this moment of hope, let us recall how 
this century--marked by so much progress and too much bloodshed, witness 
to humanity's best and humanity's worst--how this century began in 
Bosnia. At the dawn of the century, when gunfire in Sarajevo sparked the 
first of our two world wars, the British Foreign Secretary, Sir Edward 
Gray, said these words:  "The lamps are going out all over Europe. We 
shall not see them lit again in our lifetimes." 
 
But they were lit again, by an extraordinary generation of Europeans and 
Americans. The torch of freedom they carried now shines more brightly 
than ever before on every continent. That torch can shine on Bosnia 
again, but first it must warm the hearts of the Bosnian people. 
 
So I say to all the people of the Balkans on behalf of all of us who 
would come to see this peace take hold: You have seen what war has 
wrought; you know what peace can bring. Seize this chance and make it 
work. You can do nothing to erase the past, but you can do everything to 
build the future. Do not let your children down.  
 
(###) 
 
 
 
ARTICLE 10: 
 
Fact Sheets and Chronology 
 
 
Fact Sheet: Summary of the Dayton Peace Agreement 

The Dayton proximity talks culminated in the initialing on November 21, 
1995, of a General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and 
Herzegovina. The agreement was initialed by the Republic of Bosnia and 
Herzegovina, the Republic of Croatia, and the Federal Republic of 
Yugoslavia. It was witnessed by representatives of the Contact Group 
nations--the United States, Britain, France, Germany, and Russia--and 
the European Union Special Negotiator. According to the terms of the 
agreement, a sovereign state known as the Republic of Bosnia and 
Herzegovina will consist of two entities: the Bosnian Serb Republic and 
the Federation of Bosnia.  
 
The agreement and its annexes are summarized below. 
 
 
General Framework Agreement 
 
-- Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, and the Federal Republic of 
Yugoslavia (FRY) agree to fully respect the sovereign equality of one 
another and to settle disputes by peaceful means; 
-- The FRY and Bosnia and Herzegovina recognize each other and agree to 
discuss further aspects of their mutual recognition; 
-- The parties agree to fully respect and promote fulfillment of the 
commitments made in the various annexes, and they obligate themselves to 
respect human rights and the rights of refugees and displaced persons; 
and 
-- The parties agree to cooperate fully with all entities, including 
those authorized by the United Nations Security Council, in implementing 
the peace settlement and investigating and prosecuting war crimes and 
other violations of international humanitarian law. 
 
 
Annex 1-A: Military Aspects  
 
-- The cease-fire that began with the agreement of October 5, 1995, will 
continue; 
-- Foreign combatant forces currently in Bosnia are to be withdrawn 
within 30 days; 
-- The parties must complete withdrawal of forces behind a zone of 
separation of approximately 4 km within an agreed period. Special 
provisions relate to Sarajevo and Gorazde; 
-- As a confidence-building measure, the parties agree to withdraw heavy 
weapons and forces to cantonment/barracks areas within an agreed period 
and to demobilize forces which cannot be accommodated in those areas; 
-- The agreement invites into Bosnia and Herzegovina a multinational 
military implementation force, the IFOR, under the command of NATO, with 
a grant of authority from the UN; 
-- The IFOR will have the right to monitor and help ensure compliance 
with the agreement on military aspects and fulfill certain supporting 
tasks. The IFOR will have the right to carry out its mission vigorously, 
including with the use of force as necessary. It will have unimpeded 
freedom of movement, control over air space, and status of forces 
protection; 
-- A Joint Military Commission is established, to be chaired by the IFOR 
Commander. Persons under indictment by the international war crimes tri- 
bunal cannot participate; 
-- Information on mines, military personnel, weaponry, and other items 
must be provided to the Joint Military Commission within agreed periods; 
and 
-- All combatants and civilians must be released and transferred without 
delay in accordance with a plan to be developed by the International 
Committee of the Red Cross. 
 
 
Annex 1-B: Regional Stabilization 
 
-- Representatives of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the 
Federation of Bosnia, and the Bosnian Serb Republic must begin 
negotiations within 7 days, under Organization for Security and 
Cooperation in Europe (OSCE) auspices, with the objective of agreeing on 
confidence-building measures within 45 days. These could include, for 
example, restrictions on military deployments and exercises, 
notification of military activities, and exchange of data; 
-- The Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Federation of Bosnia, and 
the Bosnian Serb Republic, as well as Croatia and the Federal Republic 
of Yugoslavia agree not to import arms for 90 days and not to import any 
heavy weapons, heavy weapons ammunition, mines, military aircraft, and 
helicopters for 180 days or until an arms control agreement takes 
effect; 
-- All five parties must begin negotiations within 30 days, under OSCE 
auspices, to agree on numerical limits on holdings of tanks, artillery, 
armored combat vehicles, combat aircraft, and attack helicopters; 
-- If the parties fail to establish limits on these categories within 
180 days, the agreement provides for specified limits to come into force 
for the parties; and 
-- The OSCE will organize and conduct negotiations to establish a 
regional balance in and around the former Yugoslavia. 
 
 
Annex 2: Inter-Entity Boundary 
 
-- An inter-entity boundary line between the Federation of Bosnia and 
the Bosnian Serb Republic is agreed to; 
-- Sarajevo will be reunified within the Federation of Bosnia and will 
be open to all people of the country; 
-- Gorazde will remain secure and accessible, linked to the Federation 
of Bosnia by a land corridor; and 
-- The status of Brcko will be determined by arbitration within one 
year. 
 
 
Annex 3: Elections 
 
-- Free and fair, internationally supervised elections will be conducted 
within six to nine months for the presidency and House of 
Representatives of Bosnia and Herzegovina, for the House of 
Representatives of the Federation of Bosnia, and the National Assembly 
and presidency of the Bosnian Serb Republic, and, if feasible, for local 
offices; 
-- Refugees and persons displaced by the conflict will have the right to 
vote (including by absentee ballot) in their original place of residence 
if they choose to do so; 
-- The parties must create conditions in which free and fair elections 
can be held by protecting the right to vote in secret and ensuring 
freedom of expression and the press; 
-- The OSCE is requested to supervise the preparation and conduct of 
these elections; and 
-- All citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina aged 18 or older listed on the 
1991 Bosnian census are eligible to vote.  
 
 
Annex 4: Constitution  
 
-- A new constitution for the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which 
will be known as "Bosnia and Herzegovina," will be adopted upon 
signature at Paris; 
-- Bosnia and Herzegovina will continue as a sovereign state within its 
present internationally-recognized borders. It will consist of two 
entities: the Federation of Bosnia and the Bosnian Serb Republic; 
-- The constitution provides for the protection of human rights and the 
free movement of people, goods, capital and services throughout Bosnia 
and Herzegovina; 
-- The central government will have a presidency, a two chamber 
legislature, and a constitutional court. Direct elections will be held 
for the presidency and one of the legislative chambers;  
-- There will be a central bank and monetary system, and the central 
government will also have responsibilities for foreign policy, law 
enforcement, air traffic control, communications and other areas to be 
agreed; 
-- Military coordination will take place through a committee including 
members of the presidency; 
-- No person who is serving a sentence imposed by the international 
tribunal, and no person who is under indictment by the tribunal and who 
has failed to comply with an order to appear before the tribunal, may 
stand as a candidate or hold any appointive, elective, or other public 
office in the territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina. 
 
 
Annex 5: Arbitration  
 
The Federation of Bosnia and the Bosnian Serb Republic agree to enter 
into reciprocal commitments to engage in binding arbitration to resolve 
disputes between them, and they agree to design and implement a system 
of arbitration. 
 
 
Annex 6: Human Rights 
 
-- The agreement guarantees internationally recognized human rights and 
fundamental freedoms for all persons within Bosnia and Herzegovina; 
-- A Commission on Human Rights, composed of a human rights ombudsman 
and a human rights chamber (court), is established; 
-- The ombudsman is authorized to investigate human rights violations, 
issue findings, and bring and participate in proceedings before the 
human rights chamber; 
-- The human rights chamber is authorized to hear and decide human 
rights claims and to issue binding decisions; and 
-- The parties agree to grant UN human rights agencies, the OSCE, the 
international tribunal and other organizations full access to monitor 
the human rights situation. 
 
 
Annex 7: Refugees and Displaced Persons 
 
-- The agreement grants refugees and displaced persons the right to 
return home safely and either regain lost property or obtain just 
compensation; 
-- A Commission for Displaced Persons and Refugees will decide on return 
of real property or compensation, with the authority to issue final 
decisions; 
-- All persons are granted the right to move freely throughout the 
country, without harassment or discrimination; and 
-- The parties commit to cooperate with the ICRC in finding all missing 
persons. 
 
 
Annex 8: Commission to Preserve National Monuments 
 
-- A Commission to Preserve National Monuments is established; 
-- The commission is authorized to receive and act upon petitions to 
designate as national monuments movable or immovable property of great 
importance to a group of people with a common cultural, historic, 
religious, or ethnic heritage; and  
-- When property is designated as a national monument, the entities will 
make every effort to take appropriate legal, technical, financial and 
other measures to protect and conserve the national monument and refrain 
from taking deliberate actions which might damage it. 
 
 
Annex 9: Bosnia and Herzegovina Public Corporations 
 
-- A Bosnia and Herzegovina Transportation Corporation is established to 
organize and operate transportation facilities, such as roads, railways, 
and ports; and 
-- A Commission on Public Corporations is created to examine 
establishing other Bosnia and Herzegovina public corporations to operate 
joint public facilities such as utilities and postal service facilities. 
 
 
Annex 10: Civilian Implementation 
 
-- The parties request that a high representative be designated, 
consistent with relevant UN Security Council resolutions, to coordinate 
and facilitate civilian aspects of the peace settlement, such as 
humanitarian aid, economic reconstruction, protection of human rights, 
and the holding of free elections; 
-- The high representative will chair a Joint Civilian Commission 
comprised of senior political representatives of the parties, the IFOR 
Commander, and representatives of civilian organizations; and 
-- The high representative has no authority over the IFOR. 
 
 
Annex 11: International Police Task Force 
 
-- The UN is requested to establish a UN International Police Task Force 
(IPTF) to carry out various tasks, including training and advising local 
law enforcement personnel, as well as monitoring and inspecting law 
enforcement activities and facilities; 
-- The IPTF will be headed by a commissioner appointed by the UN 
Secretary General; and 
-- IPTF personnel must report any credible information on human rights 
violations to the Human Rights Commission, the International Tribunal or 
other appropriate organizations. 
 
 
Agreement on Initialing the General Framework Agreement 
 
-- In this agreement, which was signed at Dayton, Bosnia and 
Herzegovina, Croatia, and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia agree that 
the negotiations have been completed. They and the Entities they 
represent commit themselves to sign the General Framework Agreement and 
its Annexes in Paris. 
-- They also agree that the initialing of the General Framework 
Agreement and its Annexes in Dayton expresses their consent to be bound 
by these agreements. 
 
(###) 
 
 
 
Fact Sheet: The Road to the Dayton Peace Agreement 
 
-- The international community is united in its desire to see the Balkan 
conflict resolved at the negotiating table. The United Nations (UN), the 
European Union (EU), and the United States and other nations, acting 
separately and in groups, have attempted to resolve the Balkan conflict 
through negotiations since it began in 1991. 
-- In October 1992, EU mediator Lord David Owen and UN mediator and 
former Secretary of State Cyrus Vance proposed a draft constitution 
organizing Bosnia into a decentralized federation. This became known as 
the "Vance-Owen" plan. 
-- In February 1993, President Clinton, at the beginning of his 
Administration, named the first U.S. special envoy to UN-EU joint 
negotiations, Ambassador Reginald Bartholomew. In May 1993, U.S. efforts 
helped gain the parties' agreement to the Vance-Owen plan, but the 
Bosnian Serbs subsequently renounced the accord. 
-- In early 1994, with UN-EU efforts bogged down, the United States 
decided to undertake more active involvement, seeking to back diplomacy 
with the threat of NATO air power in protecting safe areas and UN 
peacekeepers. 
-- In March 1994, the new United States special envoy, Ambassador 
Charles Redman, and other U.S. officials led negotiations between 
Bosnia's Muslims and Croats which resulted in a cease-fire, the 
formation of a bi-communal federation, and improved relations with 
neighboring Croatia. 
-- Later in the spring of 1994, the United States, Russia, Britain, 
France, and Germany established a five-nation Contact Group, with the 
goal of brokering a settlement between the Federation and Bosnian Serbs. 

The Contact Group based its efforts on three principles: 
 
- Bosnia would remain a single state; 
- That state would consist of the Federation and a Bosnian Serb entity; 
and   
- These two entities would be linked via mutually agreed constitutional 
principles, which would also spell out relationships with Serbia and 
Croatia proper. 
 
-- In July 1994, the Contact Group put forward a proposed map presenting 
a 51/49 percent territorial compromise between the Federation and 
Bosnian Serbs. The Bosnian, Croatian, and Serbian Governments all 
accepted the proposal. The Bosnian Serbs repeatedly rejected it. 
However, all of its key principles were accepted as the basis for 
negotiations at the November 1995 proximity peace talks in Dayton. 
-- In the fall of 1994, Serbia announced it was withdrawing support for 
the Bosnian Serbs, would seal them off economically, and would allow a 
UN-EU team to monitor the border closure. The Security Council then 
offered a temporary suspension of some of the economic sanctions that 
had been in place against Serbia since 1992. 
-- In the summer of 1995, a series of events changed the situation on 
the ground. 
 
- In July, two UN-declared safe areas--Srebrenica and Zepa--were overrun 
by Bosnian Serb forces. 
- In July and August, Croatia retook most of the territory held for 
three years by separatist Krajina Serbs and thus presented itself as a 
counterweight to further Serb aggression in the region. 
 
-- In response to the fall of the safe areas, President Clinton insisted 
that NATO and the UN make good on their commitment to protect the 
remaining safe areas. The allies agreed to U.S. insistence on NATO 
decisiveness at the London Conference on July 21 and threatened broad-
based air strikes if the safe areas were attacked again. 
-- In late July, President Clinton decided that the changes on the 
ground and the new resolve displayed by NATO provided the basis for an 
all-out diplomatic effort to end the conflict. In early August, he sent 
his National Security Adviser, Anthony Lake, to present a U.S. peace 
initiative to our NATO allies and the Russians. 
-- In mid-August, U.S. negotiators, led by Assistant Secretary of State 
Richard Holbrooke, began intensive shuttle diplomacy with the parties to 
the conflict. The death of three members of the U.S. negotiating team-- 
Ambassador Robert Frasure, Dr. Joseph Kruzel, and Col. Nelson Drew--were 
an enormous tragedy, but U.S. efforts for peace intensified. 
-- In  late August, a Bosnian Serb shell killed 37 people in a Sarajevo 
market. NATO and the UN issued an ultimatum to the Bosnian Serbs: 
 
- Stop shelling Sarajevo; 
- Stop offensive action against the remaining safe areas; 
- Withdraw heavy weapons from around Sarajevo; and  
- Allow road and air access to Sarajevo. 
 
-- On August 30, after the Bosnian Serbs refused, NATO began heavy and 
continuous air strikes against the Bosnian Serb military--with many 
missions flown by American pilots. The Bosnian Serbs then complied with 
the NATO demands. 
-- At meetings sponsored by the Contact Group in Geneva (September 8, 
1995) and New York (September 26, 1995), the Foreign Ministers of 
Bosnia, Croatia, and Serbia (now also representing the Bosnian Serbs) 
agreed to basic principles for a settlement in Bosnia: 
 
- The preservation of Bosnia as a single state; 
- An equitable division of territory between the Muslim/Croat Federation 
and a Bosnian Serb entity based on the Contact Group's 51/49 formula; 
- Constitutional structures; 
- Free and fair elections; and 
- Respect for human rights. 
 
-- In early October, the United States helped broker a cease-fire, now 
holding throughout Bosnia. 
-- The United States and the other Contact Group countries invited the 
parties to Dayton, Ohio, to begin "proximity peace talks" on November 1. 
-- On November 21, the parties agreed to a settlement and initialed the 
Dayton Peace Accord, which was formally signed in Paris on December 14, 
1995.  
 
(###) 
 
 
 
Fact Sheet: NATO Involvement in the Balkan Crisis 
 
-- Throughout the Balkan crisis, NATO has undertaken a variety of 
activities in support of UN peacekeeping operations.  

-- In July 1992, NATO established a joint naval operation with the 
Western European Union to patrol the Adriatic to help enforce the UN's 
economic sanctions regime against Serbia.  

-- In the fall of 1992, the UN established a "no-fly zone" over Bosnia; 
in early 1993, NATO agreed to enforce it.  

-- In June 1993, NATO announced it would provide close air support to UN 
peacekeepers who came under attack. In August, NATO declared its 
readiness to respond with air strikes, in coordination with the UN, in 
the event that UN safe areas, including Sarajevo, came under siege. This 
decision temporarily ended the strangulation of Sarajevo.  

-- In February and April 1994, in response to renewed Bosnian Serb 
attacks on safe areas, including a brutal attack on a Sarajevo market, 
NATO established heavy-weapons-free zones around Sarajevo and Gorazde. 
Shelling of the Bihac safe area at the end of the year prompted NATO to 
expand its range of targets to include locations within Serb-held areas 
of Croatia. 

-- NATO fighters provided close air support and engaged in air strikes 
on several occasions in 1994 at the request of the UN. NATO and UN 
commanders both had to agree before air operations could be carried out. 
This arrangement, known as the "dual key," resulted in differences 
between the organizations over the threshold for military action and 
limited the effectiveness of air strikes.  

-- In 1993, when it appeared that a settlement proposal offered by 
former Secretary of State Cyrus Vance and Lord David Owen might be 
accepted by the sides, NATO undertook planning for troop deployments to 
implement peace. NATO's plan, known as OPLAN 40103, was never finalized, 
as Bosnian Serb rejection of the peace plan, coupled with renewed 
fighting, rendered the chances for settlement remote.  

-- In mid-1994, in response to a request from the UN, NATO began 
contingency planning for withdrawal of UNPROFOR troops, should the 
situation on the ground prevent them from carrying out their mission. 
This plan was known as OPLAN 40104.  

-- On many occasions, President Clinton and other senior officials have 
expressed U.S. commitment to participation as appropriate in OPLAN 40103 
and 40104. Emphasizing that they would welcome congressional support, 
Administration officials have long made clear that failure to take part 
in major alliance efforts would weaken NATO cohesion and strain 
transatlantic relations.  

-- In July 1995, after the Bosnian Serbs overran the UN safe areas of 
Srebrenica and Zepa, the United States, with some of our allies, the 
Russians, and others, attended a ministerial-level conference in London. 
The London Conference (together with subsequent NATO decisions) 
simplified the procedures for conducting air strikes, reduced the 
complications of the dual key mechanism, and greatly expanded the 
targets available for strikes. 

-- In August 1995, after the Bosnian Serbs attacked the Sarajevo safe 
area and rejected UN and NATO conditions for a heavy-weapons withdrawal, 
NATO undertook its most intense air and artillery campaign to date, 
using the new authority and improved procedures agreed to in London. The 
15-day allied campaign made clear to the Bosnian Serbs that the 
international community had no tolerance for violations of UN 
resolutions. Partly as a result of the strikes, Bosnian Serbs showed 
greater willingness to participate seriously in peace talks.  

-- By September 1995, as a result of the air strikes, changes on the 
ground regionally, and progress made by the President's negotiating 
team, it appeared once again that a settlement might be possible. A 
comprehensive cease-fire agreement was signed on October 5, 1995. NATO 
then renewed its planning for peace implementation. In October, the 
North Atlantic Council (NAC) approved a concept of operations for 
deployment of an implementation force (IFOR) into Bosnia should a peace 
settlement be reached.  

-- A General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina, 
brokered by the United States and its Contact Group partners, was 
initialed by the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Republic of 
Croatia, and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia at Wright-Patterson Air 
Force Base in Dayton, Ohio, on November 21. The agreement, which 
provides for NATO to establish IFOR to ensure compliance with the 
military aspects of the peace agreement, became effective upon formal 
signing in Paris on December 14. 

-- In an extraordinary combined meeting on December 5, NATO's Foreign 
and Defense Ministers jointly endorsed OPLAN 10405 ("Joint Endeavor"), 
the military plan for IFOR's deployment. NATO military authorities are 
now finalizing details, including participation by non-NATO nations and 
cost. Some 2,600 "theater enabling forces" already have been deployed by 
NATO. After the peace agreement was signed in Paris, the NAC gave its 
final approval for the deployment of IFOR's main body of 60,000 troops. 
Several days after deployment began, IFOR received  
a full transfer of authority from UNPROFOR, the current UN peacekeeping 
operation in Bosnia and Herzegovina.  
 
(###) 
 
 
 
Fact Sheet: Human Rights Issues in the Balkans 
 
 
Human Rights Abuses  
 
-- The war in the former Yugoslavia has involved widespread violations 
of human rights and humanitarian law, including mass killings and 
murder, systematic rape, torture, and other crimes against humanity.  

-- The term "ethnic cleansing" has entered the world's vocabulary to 
describe the horrifying range of human rights abuses--from forcible 
expulsion to murder--committed in parts of the former Yugoslavia in 
order to achieve "ethnic purity."  

-- All parties to the conflict in the Balkans have committed human 
rights violations, but the great majority have been perpetrated by Serb 
forces. Some of the worst incidents include the following.  
 
- In the fall of 1991, Serb forces shelled the Croatian coastal city of 
Dubrovnik, an action without military justification.  
- Throughout the course of the conflict, Sarajevo and other cities have 
been subjected to indiscriminate shelling. Scores of civilians have been 
killed or wounded by snipers and cluster and napalm bombs used by 
Bosnian Serb forces. Six of these cities were designated safe areas by 
the United Nations in May 1993. This did not stop the shelling.  
- Beginning in the spring of 1995, entire enclaves, ranging in size from 
towns such as Prijedor, Bijeljina, Zvornik, and Jajce, to hamlets such 
as Foca and Cerska, were "cleansed" of their Muslim and Croat residents 
in a Bosnian Serb attempt to "purify" lands they controlled.  
- In November 1991, Krajina Serbs took several hundred wounded Croatian 
soldiers from a hospital in the eastern Slavonian town of Vukovar, shot 
them in a field, and buried them in a mass grave. Serb authorities 
continue to deny international forensic teams access to the site.  
- In 1992, the Bosnian Serbs set    up a gulag of prison camps and 
detention facilities holding tens of thousands of Muslims and Croats. 
During the summer of 1992, international investigators were denied 
access to detainees, but those who escaped described repeated 
atrocities.  
- During the summer of 1995, Bosnian Serb forces overran Srebrenica and 
Zepa, committing serious violations of human rights. As many as 6,000 
male Muslim detainees were shot and buried in mass graves. The entire 
Muslim population of more than 42,000 people was "cleansed" from the 
region.  
- Evidence is mounting that human rights abuses were committed against 
Serb civilians in Croatia in mid-1995, when the Croatian military retook 
Serb-occupied western Slavonia and the Krajina region.  
 
 
The Response of the International Community  
 
-- In August 1995, the UN Commission on Human Rights established a 
Special Rapporteur to conduct on-site investigations into human rights 
violations and report on his findings. The Special Rapporteur maintains 
human rights monitors in Sarajevo, Mostar, Skopje, and Zagreb and has 
submitted a series of reports on violations throughout the former 
Yugoslavia.  

-- In October 1992, the UN Security Council approved an impartial 
international investigation to identify persons responsible for human 
rights abuses and to discourage more ethnic-based violence. The 
resulting Commission of Experts documented thousands of crimes.  

-- In the spring of 1993, the Security Council concluded that the 
atrocities committed amounted to war crimes and that international 
prosecution of individuals responsible for atrocities was integral to 
the prospects for long-term peace. As a result, it established a War 
Crimes Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia. The Tribunal subsumed the 
Commission of Experts and took over the task of amassing data on abuses. 
 
- The War Crimes Tribunal has issued indictments against 53 persons, 
including Bosnian Serb leader Radovan Karadzic and Bosnian Serb General 
Ratko Mladic. Proceedings have begun against the first defendant--a 
Bosnian Serb official accused of committing atrocities at a prison camp. 
 
-- In August 1995, after the Bosnian Serbs attacked the Sarajevo safe 
area and rejected UN and NATO conditions for a heavy-weapons withdrawal, 
NATO undertook its most intense air and artillery campaign to date, 
using the new authority and improved procedures agreed to in London. 

-- Neither Radovan Karadzic, Ratko Mladic, nor any other indicted war 
criminal was permitted to participate in the Dayton proximity peace 
talks or in any other international peace negotiations. The United 
States has consistently opposed and continues to oppose amnesty for 
indicted war criminals. As warrants are issued, nations will be obliged 
to arrest indictees in their jurisdictions. 
 
 
What the United States Has Done 
 
-- The United States led international efforts to establish and support 
the War Crimes Tribunal and has contributed more to the Tribunal than 
any other nation--upwards of $12 million. This includes financial 
contributions of nearly $9 million and the services of more than 20 
prosecutors, investigators, and other experts.  

-- The U.S. took the lead in gathering concrete evidence about the 
atrocities that took place in and around Srebrenica. Assistant Secretary 
for Democracy, Human Rights and Labor John Shattuck has traveled to the 
region to interview refugees and secure first-hand information about 
human rights violations; and Assistant Secretary for Population, 
Refugees, and Migration Phyllis Oakley has traveled there to help 
provide the necessary emergency humanitarian assistance to victims. 

-- Armed with concrete information, Secretary Christopher presented 
U.S.-gathered evidence of human rights atrocities to the participants at 
the London Conference in July and pressed for a more forceful military 
role in the region. Ambassador Albright also presented evidence to the 
UN Security Council. 

-- Under the U.S.-brokered cease-fire of October 1995, the parties 
agreed to treat civilians and prisoners humanely, to exchange prisoners 
of war under UN supervision, to afford all persons freedom of movement, 
and to guarantee the right of displaced persons to return home and 
reclaim their property. 

-- In November 1995, the United States convened the parties in Dayton, 
Ohio, and, together with the Contact Group, succeeded in negotiating a 
peace agreement. 

-- The agreement commits the parties in Bosnia and Herzegovina to 
respect the highest level of internationally recognized human rights, to 
grant human rights monitors unrestricted access to their territory, to 
cooperate with the ICRC in the search for missing persons, and to 
release all persons detained in relation to the conflict. It creates a 
Human Rights Commission to investigate and to act upon human rights 
violations. Refugees and displaced persons will have the right to return 
home or to obtain just compensation. The agreement creates a Commission 
of Refugees and Displaced Persons to adjudicate claims. 

-- The agreement reaffirms that justice is an integral part of the 
process for national reconciliation by obligating the parties to 
cooperate with the War Crimes Tribunal and promising that those who have 
committed crimes against humanity, genocide, and war crimes will be 
brought to justice. 

-- Evidence of human rights abuses gathered by the United States 
continues to be made available to the War Crimes Tribunal. Bringing an 
end to human rights abuses is a primary purpose of the peace process.   
 
(###) 
 
 
 
Chronology: The Balkan Conflict 
 
--  Strains within Yugoslavia's federated system emerged after Tito's 
death in 1980. Yugoslavia, an ethnically and religiously diverse 
federation of six republics and two autonomous provinces, operated under 
a collective government after his death. 

--  In the spring of 1990, democratic elections following the collapse 
of the communist system in Eastern Europe brought nationalist and 
independence-minded governments to power in the western-most republics 
of Slovenia and Croatia as well as in Serbia. 

--  In June 1991, Croatia and Slovenia declared their independence. This 
set off a brief conflict between Slovenes and the Yugoslav Army and a 
protracted crisis in Croatia between the newly independent government in 
Croatia and the Serbian minority in Croatia ("Krajina Serbs"), supported 
by the Yugoslav military. By the end of 1991, the Krajina Serbs had 
gained control of nearly one-third of the country. 

--  In September 1991, in order to stem the fighting, the UN Security 
Council imposed an arms embargo against all of the former Yugoslavia. 
The Secretary General also launched a mediation effort under former U.S. 
Secretary of State Cyrus Vance, which led to a cease-fire agreement in 
Croatia in early 1992 and the deployment of the first UN peacekeepers 
during the winter of 1992. 

--  In January 1992, while the mediation efforts were ongoing, the 
European Community (now the European Union), after considerable internal 
debate, decided to recognize Croatia's and Slovenia's independence. They 
deferred action on recognizing Bosnia-Herzegovina pending a referendum 
to determine public support for independence. 

--  In March 1992, voters in Bosnia overwhelmingly approved independence 
in a vote boycotted by Bosnian Serbs. Almost immediately, the Bosnian 
Serbs, backed by the Serbian-controlled Yugoslav army, began forcible 
resistance to Bosnia's independence. By the end of spring 1992, Bosnian 
Serbs, who had significant military superiority, especially in heavy 
weapons, achieved control over more than 60% of Bosnia's territory. 

--  In April 1992, the EU recognized Bosnia. The United States, which 
had declined to recognize Croatia and Slovenia earlier, recognized 
Bosnia and the other two republics at the same time. All three were 
admitted to the UN in May. In response to continued Serb aggression, the 
UN Security Council imposed economic sanctions against Serbia at the end 
of May. 

--  During the summer of 1992, as the human rights and humanitarian 
crisis escalated, the Security Council voted to send UN peacekeepers to 
Bosnia to facilitate delivery of humanitarian relief. To help assure the 
safety of humanitarian operations, the UN imposed a "no-fly zone" over 
Bosnia in October 1992. In April 1993, NATO began to enforce the no-fly 
zone. 

--  In December 1992, the United States warned Serbia that the United 
States would respond in the event of Serb-inspired violence in Kosovo. 

--  In early 1993, UN peacekeepers deployed to The Former Yugoslav 
Republic of Macedonia (FYROM). The United States decided to participate 
in order to prevent a widening of the conflict. Five hundred fifty U.S. 
troops, as well as 550 troops from other nations, remain in the FYROM. 

--  In May 1993, the UN declared Sarajevo and five other Muslim enclaves 
"safe areas" under UN protection. NATO agreed in June to use air power 
to protect UN forces if attacked. 

--  In August 1993, NATO declared its readiness to respond with air 
strikes, in coordination with the UN, in the event that UN safe areas, 
including Sarajevo, came under siege. This decision temporarily ended 
the strangulation of Sarajevo. 

--  In February 1994, in response to a Bosnian Serb attack killing 68 
civilians in a Sarajevo marketplace, NATO issued an ultimatum that if 
Bosnian Serb heavy weapons were not withdrawn from UN-monitored 
exclusion zones around the capital, Bosnian Serb forces would be subject 
to air strikes. 

--  In early 1994, with UN-EU diplomatic efforts stalled over 
territorial issues, the United States began more active efforts to 
encourage a settlement. 

--  In March 1994, U.S. mediation produced an agreement between the 
Bosnian Government, Bosnian Croats, and the Government of Croatia to 
establish a Federation between Muslims and Croats in Bosnia. Fighting 
between the two sides ceased and has not resumed. 

--  In April 1994, NATO employed its first air strikes against Bosnian 
Serb forces to halt a Serb attack on the eastern enclave and UN safe 
area of Gorazde. 

--  In the spring of 1994, the United States, Russia, Britain, France, 
and Germany established a five-nation Contact Group, with the goal of 
brokering a settlement between the Federation and Bosnian Serbs. 

--  In late 1994, new fighting erupted between the Bosnian Government, 
anti-government Muslims in Bihac (support by Krajina Serbs), and Bosnian 
Serbs. NATO responded by expanding the range for air strikes into Serb-
controlled Croatia. 

--  In December 1994, with the help of former President Jimmy Carter, 
the sides agreed to a four-month cessation of hostilities. When the 
period expired, fighting resumed, and in May, the Bosnian Serb forces 
began renewed attacks on Sarajevo and began threatening Srebrenica. 

--  In the spring of 1995, Bosnian Serb forces responded to NATO air 
strikes by taking more than 350 UN peacekeepers hostage. Serbia 
intervened to help negotiate the release of hostages. On June 8, United 
States and allied forces rescued a U.S. pilot, Capt. Scott O'Grady, who 
had been shot down over Bosnia on June 2. 

--  In July 1995, in response to the fall of the safe areas of 
Srebrenica and Zepa, President Clinton insisted that NATO and the UN 
make good on their commitment to protect the remaining safe areas. The 
allies agreed to U.S. insistence on NATO decisiveness at the London 
Conference on July 21 and threatened broad-based air strikes if the safe 
areas were attacked again. When the Bosnian Serbs tested this ultimatum, 
NATO undertook an intensive month-long bombing campaign. 

--  In late July, President Clinton decided that changes on the ground 
and the new resolve displayed by NATO provided the basis for an all-out 
diplomatic effort to end the conflict. In early August, he sent his 
National Security Adviser, Anthony Lake, to present a U.S. peace 
initiative to our NATO allies and the Russians. 

--  U.S.-led mediation produced an agreement by the parties to basic 
principles of a settlement as well as a cease-fire which went into 
effect in October. Proximity peace talks toward settlement began in 
Dayton, Ohio, on November 1. 

--  On November 21, the parties agreed to a settlement. The Dayton 
Accord was implemented following its formal signature in Paris on 
December 14, 1995.  
 
(###) 
 
 
[END DISPATCH SUPPLEMENT VOL 6, NO. 5]
(###)

To the top of this page


Index of Dispatch Magazine Archives 1995 Issues|| Index of Dispatch Magazine Archives|| Index of "Briefings and Statements"
Index of Electronic Research Collections ERC Reference Desk || Alphabetic Index || Sitemap || ERC Homepage
Last modified: Jun. 8, 1999