USFP

During the 1990s, the US intervened in the conflicts in former Yugoslavia. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, the US intervened to stop the ethnic cleansing campaign by Bosnian Serbs against Bosniak and Croatian civilians. In Kosovo, the US intervened to prevent the ethnic cleansing of Kosovo Albanians by Serbian forces. The US used NATO airstrikes to target Serbian government buildings and infrastructure. The legality of the NATO bombings was debated, but the US claimed a moral duty to intervene to prevent genocide and human rights violations. The US intervention was part of a larger shift in international relations towards humanitarianism and a unipolar world led by the US. The Clinton administration saw intervention as a key part of shaping the international system and promoting democracy and human rights. The US collaborated with NATO and the UN in its intervention in former Yugoslavia, receiving international support for its actions. This is our presentation on U.S. intervention in former Yugoslavia. Historical context. Communist leader Josip Broz Tito established the Federal People's Republic of Yugoslavia in 1945. The Federation included six republics, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, Macedonia, Montenegro, Serbia, including the regions of Kosovo and Vojvodina, and Slovenia. The Soviet bloc began its breakup in 1991 with the declarations of independence from Slovenia and Croatia, effectively ending the Socialist Federal Republic's existence. In April 1992, Macedonia and Bosnia and Herzegovina followed suit and declared independence. This left only Serbia and Montenegro within the Federation, which became known as the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia on the 27th of April, 1992. U.S. intervention. Bosnia and Herzegovina. The U.S. shared diplomatic relations with the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia through to 1992. The Bosnian War began in April 1992 and concluded on the 14th of December, 1995. This census shows the ethnic diversity of Bosnia before the war. April 5, 1992, Bosnia announced its independence from Yugoslavia. This independent Bosnia would have a Bosniak majority, which was opposed by Bosnian Serbs. The Serbs launched a military ethnic cleansing campaign to secure coveted territory and cleanse Bosnia of its Muslim civilian population, targeting Bosniak and Croatian civilians in areas under their control. 100,000 people were estimated to have been killed, 80% of whom were Bosniaks, and 2 million people were displaced from their homes. In July 1995, Bosnian Serb forces killed as many as 8,000 Bosniak men and boys from the town of Srebrenica. It was the largest massacre in Europe since the Holocaust. This genocidal act placed massive pressure on the U.S. as Srebrenica was declared to be under UN protection two years prior. However, no UN resistance was present. The Clinton administration decided the war had gone too far and intervention was necessary in August 1995. Before the genocide at Srebrenica, U.S. foreign policy in Yugoslavia had been characterized by diplomacy and concessions in an attempt to initiate peace talks. The U.S. refused to send in troops and aimed to keep the moral high ground. Anthony Lake, Clinton's national security advisor, described Bosnia as the cancer eating away at American foreign policy. Bosnia was undermining the U.S. global reputation as a peacekeeper and promoter of democracy, forcing foreign policy to change due to growing discontent. A NATO bombing campaign ensued, forcing Bosnian officials to the negotiating table. The Dayton Accord was signed in 1995, marking a peaceful conclusion to the conflict, stabilizing the country and ending the civil war. The Kosovo-Serbian Conflict Kosovo was a point of contention, a province under the control of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, Serbian Montenegro. 90% of the Kosovo population is ethnic Albanian and 10% Serbian. Even in the 21st century, the strong Albanian majority is evident. In 1989, Ibrahim Rugova, leader of the ethnic Albanians in Kosovo, initiated a policy of non-violent resistance to Serbian rule under Slobodan Milosevic, then president of the Serbian Republic. Serbians alleged that they were the victims of a silent ethnic cleansing, where Kosovar Albanians made it increasingly difficult for Serbians to live in the province. The Balkan crisis deteriorated into civil war and Kosovo developed a militant Kosovo Liberation Army in 1996. There was a lack of international recognition of the conflict. Their aim was for Kosovo independence. The KLA launched an offensive across Kosovo, attacking Serbian police and politicians while seizing control of nearly half the province. The Serbian troops launched a counter-offensive and drove thousands of ethnic Albanians from their homes. This wave of refugees drew international attention to the conflict. The informal contact groups consisting of the US, UK, France, Germany, Italy and Russia demanded a ceasefire and the removal of Yugoslav armed forces from the province. September 1998, the UN passed Resolution 1199 calling for a Yugoslav government to end the conflict and enter peace negotiations with the KLA. NATO Involvement To incentivize Serbia into agreement, NATO threatened airstrikes stemming Serbia's Communist Party leader Slobodan Milosevic to allow the return of thousands of refugees. Peace talks in 1999 failed. 28,000 NATO troops were proposed to be stationed in Kosovo to ensure any agreements were upheld. March 24, 1999, NATO launched airstrikes to target Serbian government buildings and their infrastructure to destabilize the communist regime in a 78-day operation. NATO claimed the bombing was to prevent the ethnic cleansing of Kosovo Albanians. Legal Implications of NATO Bombings According to Article 52 of the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, 1969, a treaty is considered void if it has been concluded through the threat or use of force. The US was in violation of this article as it threatened Yugoslavia to sign or face bombing. Article 24 of the UN Charter prohibits the use of force by any state or group of states except for self-defense or authorized by the UN Security Council. This means NATO bombing was illegal under international law. An explicit mandate from the Security Council was also required by NATO as a regional organization under Article 53 of the UN Charter to use enforcement action. The US claims the international community has a moral duty and obligation to intervene in the affairs of a sovereign state to prevent genocide and catastrophic human rights violations. Varadarajan suggests the real reasons for Washington intervention in Yugoslavia are the eventual creation of an independent Kosovo will allow the permanent military presence of the US in the Balkans and destroying remaining Russian influence in the region. Theories behind the intervention As the 1990s progressed they became known as the decade of humanitarianism as throughout the conflict there were many humanitarian interventions from NATO-led coalitions of states. The 1990s presented a shift in the international system and this became known as the Unicolor Movement. A unicolor movement is when one power is considered the dominant global power without any challenges. The conflict drew attention after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the US became the single global dominant power. The aim of the US grand strategy is to prevent any other power from surpassing or equaling the United States power. During this time the US enjoyed significant influence around the world. Global affairs were characterized by an argent hegemony. They were able to exert their political, economic and military influence largely unopposed. Many debate how stable the international system is during a period of unipolarity. Realists see this as unstable because there is no checks against the superpower which destabilizes the system and this can cause uncertainty. Although others argue that unipolarity can provide order in the system, strong leadership that opposes democratic norms and promotes peace can affect human rights. Cooperation and alliances can preserve the balance of power. US intervention with the United States and Yugoslavia is evidence of this, promoting peace and protecting those vulnerable under rule of law. The Clinton administration had a new vision for the new world order of pragmatism and stability. Clinton had a vision of multilateralism via diplomatic leadership and via machine and use of military force. The US throughout history has always saw themselves as the defender of democracy, both domestically and internationally. In this new world order, the US saw themselves as a key player in shaping the international system and viewed intervention in conflicts like those of former Yugoslavia as a key part of this role. Clinton emphasized in 1995 that the US has a special responsibility to protect those whose human rights are being violated. Liberal internationalism was a foreign policy approach that emphasized democracy, human rights, and free markets. Clinton emphasized in his National Security Report the enlargement doctrine that free market democracies and commitment to global security can ensure economic independence. International cooperation with institutions and multilateralism are essential aspects of democratic societies to achieve peace and prosperity. Liberal internationalists argue for intervention when fundamental human rights are being violated and there is a regional threat. Monetary intervention is a part of liberal internationalism that advocates for military force to stop human rights abuses. Belief that sovereignty is not absolute and the international community has a responsibility to protect those from atrocities. Following the breakup of Yugoslavia and the exit of Clinton, images of mass graves shocked the international community. The US faced huge pressures to intervene and stop the bloodshed. Concern for Iran became apparent that the humanitarian crisis could no longer be ignored. Philosopher Walter argued that the situation is complex, but the international community had a moral obligation to intervene and protect those vulnerable citizens from active cleansing. Stability of the Balkans was crucial for European security. There was an international fear that the spread of the conflict could draw in neighbouring countries. The US had an interest in maintaining its credibility as a global leader and their commitment to promoting human rights. This was characterised by overt, multilateral, UN-approved efforts that focused on humanitarianism and stabilising liberal democracy. US intervention in former Yugoslavia was largely a collaboration with NATO and the United Nations. This multilateral approach is consistent with liberal internationalist principles and they received widespread international support for their intervention to protect human rights. The concept of responsibility to protect is linked to liberal internationalism and emphasises the responsibility of the international community to intervene in mass atrocities. The US intervention opposed these principles as it was necessary to prevent further loss of life and to protect civilians. This was endorsed by the UN in 2005. The democratic peace theory impacts liberal internationalism. This suggests that democracies are less likely to go to war together. The Yugoslavia intervention was viewed as an attempt to promote democracy and stability reducing the possibility of future conflicts. The US sought to promote peaceful democratic transitions and foster peaceful coexistence among ethnically diverse societies reflecting the power of democratic governance. The US intervention is illustrative of how liberal internationalism can shape the narrative through promoting democracy, human rights and multilateral cooperation. The US intervention is never without criticism but the underlying rationale of defending those most vulnerable and promoting stability reflects liberal values on the work stage.