THE Cabinet decided yesterday, on the advice of the military chiefs of
staff, not to send more British ground troops to Bosnia. The Prime
Minister told the Commons that if the United Nations asked for more
British troops he would consider it.
General Sir Michael Rose and the UN political envoy in Bosnia, Mr
Yasushi Akashi, astonished all the western political leaders involved in
the Bosnian crisis with renewed demands for at least another 10,000
soldiers on the ground immediately to supervise the end of Bosnian Serb
bombardments on Sarajevo and other key towns.
Mr Major told the Commons yesterday that Britain had not been asked by
UN General Secretary Boutros Boutros-Ghali for more British troops. The
Cabinet wants other nations, like Belgium, to provide more troops on the
ground when the UN makes a specific request to the nations involved.
Mr Major, who had a meeting with Mr Boutros-Ghali in New York two days
ago, told the Commons yesterday that he was not being asked for more
British troops at this stage. It was agreed in Cabinet that if a
specific request for more British troops was made by the UN it would
have to be considered seriously. Ministers came to this view on the
basis of another policy paper from the chiefs of the defence staff
advocating that another 1000 men should not yet be committed.
Last night at Westminster it was clear that General Rose would like
more British troops for Bosnia, particularly as they have been trained
in Northern Ireland. But the Government wants to wait to see whether
other nations can meet the call for another 10,000 troops on the ground.
The issue was highlighted by deliberately public pronouncements from
the French General Jean Cot and the Japanese UN political representative
in Bosnia Mr Akashi, who appeared to be determined to get the additional
10,000 men on the ground immediately.
General Cot, who represents the largest Nato force in the former
Yugoslavia, said that President Clinton's refusal to put ground troops
into Bosnia is a ''strange and not very courageous idea''. The Prime
Minister, while in Washington earlier this week, was able to reaffirm
that President Clinton would not commit US ground troops until there is
an agreed peace settlement.
Mr Akashi went on television yesterday to declare that the UN needed
4600 more troops to enforce the Sarajevo truce plus 6050 to keep apart
Muslims and Croats in Central Bosnia, plus 150 more military observers
and an additional 500 UN civil police.
General Cot also spelled out the realities of the situation. He said
that the only countries in a position to despatch troops immediately
were, ''first, the US, second Britain, third France''. None of these
countries are prepared to commit more infantry to a dangerous situation.
Mr Major will not commit another 1000 men to Bosnia unless he is
specifically asked by the UN Security Council to do so. His Cabinet and
his back benchers are solidly behind him on this issue and President
Clinton takes the same view.
Last night the Prime Minister was reassuring his back benchers that he
will stand on his policy that if 10,000 more troops must go to Bosnia
they will have to come from other nations -- Italy, Belgium, and Spain.
The Muslim countries, including Nato member Turkey and other nations
in the Middle East want to put more troops on the ground. But President
Clinton and Mr Major, after their talks in Washington on Tuesday, are
determined that Muslim nations should provide the money, not the troops
to support the UN position.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article