# data[].attributes.body
Pick a theme, and conduct research centered around the theme to evaluate the US's intervention into Bosnia.

Your response is:

1. Paragraphs directly copied from your sources. One paragraph per source, and total of two sources are required. Make sure your copied paragraphs are relevant to the topic you chose.

2. Upload a link to a Youtube video you found to your post - make sure the video answers the topic you chose.

3. Write a 100-200 word reflection on how both paragraphs and the video elaborate on the topic you chose.

At the bottom of your response, cite your sources in the form of Title, Author, and URL address. Make sure to use reliable sources.

Theme:

1. UN (United Nothing) - focus on the shortcomings and failures of UN Peacekeeping forces in Bosnia. Why was the UN so useless in Bosnia?

Keywords: Srebrenica, UN, failure

2. American Leadership - focus on how the transition from President Bush Sr. to President Clinton shaped US policy in Bosnia. Why did Clinton become more active in intervening into Bosnia?

Key phrases: Clinton interventionism, Clinton foreign policy Bosnia, Bush foreign policy Bosnia

3. Questionable Allies - focus on how US allies in Europe approached the question of peace in Bosnia, and how their different approach collided with American approach.

Key phrases: French British foreign policy Bosnia, NATO slow decision Bosnia...

4. Choose your own angle, consult with me before pursuing your own angle on Bosnian War.

# data[].attributes.body
Student Name: Jaemin Hyun

Period: 3

Theme Number: 1

"DutchBat III, so called because it was the third of several Dutch Army contingents to serve as UN peacekeepers in the Srebrenica enclave, arrived in January 1995. The battalion was under-supplied, under-equipped and its superiors at the UN command in Sarajevo were unwilling to given it extensive support.

Its mandate was not clearly defined, and Dutch military officials had made no efforts to procure detailed information about what was going on in the Srebrenica area. All this created an impossible situation for the Dutch troops who were tasked with implementing their orders to watch over the UN-declared ‘safe zone’, which had been encircled by Bosnian Serb forces, without using force except for in self-defence."

‘It Was Hell’: Dutch Troops Recall Failure to Stop Srebrenica Deaths, Balkan Insight, Tom Brown, https://balkaninsight.com/2019/08/08/it-was-hell-dutch-troops-recall-failure-to-stop-srebrenica-deaths/

"''Through error, misjudgment and the inability to recognize the scope of evil confronting us we failed to do our part to save the people of Srebrenica from the Serb campaign of mass murder,'' a senior United Nations official said today, introducing the report. ''These failings were in part rooted in a philosophy of neutrality and nonviolence wholly unsuited to the conflict in Bosnia.''

''In particular,'' this official said, ''the report makes clear the inadequacy of the entire approach of the United Nations to the Serb campaign of ethnic cleansing and mass murder, culminating at Srebrenica.''"

U.N. Details Its Failure to Stop '95 Bosnia Massacre, The New York Times, Barbara Corsette, https://www.nytimes.com/1999/11/16/world/un-details-its-failure-to-stop-95-bosnia-massacre.html.

Reflection:

In the early 1990s, the United Nations' attempts to prevent violence in Bosnia, especially in Srebrenica, were marred by profound incompetence and ineffectiveness. DutchBat III, the Dutch Army contingent serving as UN peacekeepers in Srebrenica, was critically under-supplied and under-equipped, reflecting the UN command's reluctance in Sarajevo to provide necessary support. This battalion, arriving in January 1995, faced an undefined mandate and a lack of effort from Dutch military officials to understand the situation in Srebrenica, creating a dire scenario for the troops. Tasked with overseeing a UN-declared 'safe zone' surrounded by Bosnian Serb forces, they were instructed not to use force except in self-defense, effectively setting them up for failure. The UN's acknowledgment of its failure, as highlighted by a senior official, stems from a misguided adherence to neutrality and nonviolence, a stance ill-suited to the conflict's realities. This approach failed to address the Serb campaign of ethnic cleansing and mass murder, culminating disastrously at Srebrenica, underscoring a comprehensive failure in the UN's strategy and execution.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Srebrenica: The Trauma Of The Blue Berets

# data[].attributes.body
"After Srebrenica was declared a safe area, the UN Security Council declared five other besieged towns and cities across Bosnia “safe havens” as well. UN Secretary General Boutros Boutros-Ghali asked UN member states to contribute 37,000 peacekeepers to defend them. After Security Council members criticised the size of the request, Boutros Ghali scaled back the number to a “light option” of only 7,600 peacekeepers. More than any other act, that decision doomed the residents of Srebrenica. The international community pledged to help the people of Srebrenica and Bosnia, but then failed to provide the military resources needed to do so."

The Srebrenica Genocide in Context of the War of Agression, Remembering Srebrenica,

https://srebrenica.org.uk/what-happened/history/introduction-srebrenica

"The fall of the town of Srebrenica and its environs to Bosnian Serb forces in early July 1995 made a mockery of the international community’s professed commitment to safeguard regions it declared to be “safe areas” and placed under United Nations protection in 1993. United Nations peacekeeping officials were unwilling to heed requests for support from their own forces stationed within the enclave, thus allowing Bosnian Serb forces to easily overrun it and—without interference from U.N. soldiers—to carry out systematic, mass executions of hundreds, possibly thousands, of civilian men and boys and to terrorize, rape, beat, execute, rob and otherwise abuse civilians being deported from the area."

BOSNIA-HERCEGOVINAThe Fall of Srebrenica and the Failure of U.N. Peacekeeping , https://www.hrw.org/legacy/summaries/s.bosnia9510.html

Video (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r-S69esHPg8)

Reflection: The UN declared srebrenica and five other besieged towns as safe spots. This was a good plan on their part however they were not able to flow through. The UN did not send enough peacekeepers to protect the towns. Originally they planned on sending  37,000 peacekeepers to defend them however the security council was criticized for sending excessive numbers they went with a lighter option of only 7,600 peacekeepers. This is a drastic difference of about 30,000 less peacekeepers. The UN council should have not decreased the amount of peacekeepers that drastically. When they got criticized on the excessive numbers they should have lowered it  down to a good number like around 20,000 so that they would still be able to protect the safe zones.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The Srebrenica Genocide in Context of the War of Agression | Remembering Srebrenica

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Pulitzer-prize winning journalist, David Rohde, explains the Srebrenica genocide within the wider context of the Bosnian War.

# data[].attributes.body
Student Name: Yeahna lee

Period: 4

Theme: United Nothing

"This video was an interview from a previous UN worker who was involved with the Bosnia War. She talked about the goals of the UN, which was to provide humanitarian relief. During this time, the United Nations wanted to "provide protection so that humanitarian relief could get to the besieged people in Sarajevo"

However, the truth was that during the fall of the Srebrenica town, the UN officials were unwilling to heed requests for support from their own forces stationed within the town. This allowed Bosnian Serb forces to overrun it and carry out "systematic, mass executions of hundreds, possibly thousands, of civilian men and boys to terrorize, rape, beat, execute, rob, and otherwise abuse civilians being deported from the area". Although the intention of the UN was to help the people in Bosnia receive a safe haven, they did not execute this plan. The theme goes with the UN being "United Nothing" because it didn't seem like they did much during the Bosnia War to protect the people from danger.

https://www.hrw.org/legacy/summaries/s.bosnia9510.html

This article opens by saying, "Nothing explains the United Nations' peacekeeping failure better than the Bosnian War (1992-1995). Despite the presence of the UN peacekeepers, the war culminated in one of the most horrendous massacres of all time." Though the goal of the UN was to help the Bosniaks, the UN was unable to protect them from danger. The peacekeepers at this time were not recruited or trained by the United Nations, and instead were troops, police and military experts from member countries. Some people believe that it was the most unsuccessful peacekeeping missions of the UN, and lead to a devastating humanitarian loss. Additionally, the UN peacekeepers were placed only in safe zones, with the intention of protecting the people within those zones, but failed miserably. "By 1995, the Serb forces had launched attacks in all the "safe zones", carrying out genocide and displacing hundred and thousands of Bosnian men, women, and children.

https://www.paradigmshift.com.pk/bosnian-genocide/

These sources connect to the topic I chose because it shows how the UN did nothing to help the Bosniaks from danger. The article talks about specific data from the war, and how it is viewed as the UN's worst failure.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How was the United Nations involved in Bosnian peacekeeping? - Choices Program

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
History and Current Issues Curriculum for the Classroom

# data[].attributes.body
Student Name: Akhila Pithani

Period: 4

Theme Number 2

"...Bosnia became strategic because of its geopolitical location in a Europe supposedly secured by NATO and because of the negative sign value it accumulated over the course of its bloody war. The Bosnian war exposed the limits of the Bush administration's New World Order, the inability of the European Union to impose peace, the weaknesses of the United Nations, the impotency of NATO, and the leadership failures of the United States. It thus became strategically important as a threatening sign of disorder in Europe that the United States needed to confront in order to relegitimate NATO and its plans for expansionism, and to regenerate its national exceptionalist identity as a global power."

A Strategic Sign: The Geopolitical Significance of 'Bosnia' in US Foreign Policy, Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, Gearóid Ó Tuathail, https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1068/d170515?journalCode=epda

"The real reason, however, was the palpable sense that Bosnia was the cancer eating away at American foreign policy, in the words of Anthony Lake, Clinton’s national security adviser. U.S. credibility abroad was being undermined perceptibly by what was happening in Bosnia, and by the America’s and NATO’s failure to end it. With presidential elections a little over a year away, the White House in particular felt the need to find a way out."

Decision to Intervene: How the War in Bosnia Ended, Brookings, Ivo H. Daalder, https://www.brookings.edu/articles/decision-to-intervene-how-the-war-in-bosnia-ended/

Video:

Geopolitical, Domestic, or Humanitarian? Theory-Testing for United States' 1995 Bosnia Intervention

Reflection:

Bush's New World Order strategy proved to be ineffective in resolving the conflict in Bosnia, which was starting to receive public attention around the world. Bosnia is located in an area of Europe that was supposed to be secured by NATO, who thus far had failed to improve the situation. The US felt the need to do something to reaffirm their image as a world power, and make NATO seem more effective. Clinton had previously chosen not to interfere in the Rwandan genocide, and felt as though interfering in Bosnia may bolster his and America's reputation soon before the upcoming election. This political pressure felt within the White House was a large reason as to why the Clinton administration chose to arrange a peace treaty to end the war in Bosnia.

# data[].attributes.body
Student Name: Joseph Pelc

Period: 4

Theme Number: 1

"We report on the mishandling of the crisis by the U.N.’s Bosnia peacekeeping force UNPROFOR/UNPF—from the craven decisions of its field commanders prior to the fall of Srebrenica, to its apparent suppression and destruction of evidence of massive human rights abuses immediately after the fall of the “safe area.” We also report on the Dutch Defense Ministry’s “mislaying” of a crucial list of missing Bosnian men and boys and its destruction of a video tape showing Bosnian Serb soldiers engaged in extrajudicial executions as Dutch U.N. troops looked on."

BOSNIA-HERCEGOVINAThe Fall of Srebrenica and the Failure of U.N. Peacekeeping, Human Rights Watch, https://www.hrw.org/legacy/summaries/s.bosnia9510.html

The primary arguments in this analysis include: the UN was ineffective in the conflict in Bosnia since it failed to end the bloodshed; the UN was most limited by domestic factors in Bosnia (the situation on the ground) rather than factors within the UN structure; the UNHCR was the only effective UN agency during the conflict; and the tragic losses during the Bosnian War could have been prevented or greatly reduced if the UN had effectively enforced its strategies. The failure of the United Nations in Bosnia is evident due to its the inability to successfully stop the violence before the death toll escalated to 200,000.

Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing: An Analysis on the Role of the United Nations during the Bosnian War, Iman Zekri, https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1054&context=ureca#:~:text=During%20the%20conflict%20in%20Bosnia,permitted%20the%20conflict%20to%20persist.

Reflection:

The United Nations tried to set up safe camps and tried to help bring peace to the people of Bosnia, but because they decided they didnt want to fight back, they let all the Serbs enter one of their camps and mass execute a bunch of their enemys just based on their Ethnicity. This was found to be a major violation of human rights and many people were charged. If the UN had enforced the safe zones, and tried to spread peace, there could have been less casualties. The UN was useless in Bosnia because it didnt put enough effort into helping slow the war. They just created "fake" safe zones that the Serbs just invaded. They created a false sense of safety for the people. The United Nations didnt invest enough into protecting the peace of Bosnia.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
USA/UN - UN Peacekeeping Efforts In Bosnia Failed

# data[].attributes.body
Student Name: Ryan Bole

Period 4

Theme #1

"“Through error, misjudgment and an inability to recognize the scope of the evil confronting us, we failed to do our part to help save the people of Srebrenica from the [Bosnian] Serb campaign of mass murder.”" - UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan - Britannica

"On 16 April 1993, the United Nations Security Council declared that Srebrenica was a ‘safe area’ and called for the area to be free from armed attacks. Despite this, the violence and killings continued. This culminated in a massacre, beginning on 13 July 1995 and lasting at least 72 hours, in which the Serbian army entered the town and began their campaign of genocide including mass executions, deportation of Bosniaks from their homes, and the use of rape as a weapon of war." - Holocaust Memorial Day Trust

"Amid chaos and terror, thousands of civilians fled Srebrenica for the nearby village of Potočari, where a contingent of about 200 Dutch peacekeepers was stationed. Some of the Dutch surrendered, while others withdrew; none fired on the advancing Bosnian Serb forces. On July 11, Bosnian Serb military leader Ratko Mladić strolled through Srebrenica and, in a statement recorded on film by a Serb journalist, said, “We give this town to the Serb nation…The time has come to take revenge on the Muslims.”" - Britannica

Reflection: With the invasion of Bosnia by the Serbs, the Bosniaks fled to other countries, but those who were unable to leave went to the only safe zone in Bosnia, Srebrenica. This safe zone was occupied by Dutch peacekeepers representing the UN Security Council. The efforts of the United Nations to keep the Serbs at bay anywhere else were little to non-existent. The UN, avoiding a bigger war, let the Serbs take Srebrenica, a designated safe zone that was quickly abandoned by the peacekeepers. The result of the inaction, according to one source more than 8,000 Bosniaks were killed, another says upwards of 30,000. The UN called for the Serbs to immediately withdraw from Srebrenica, but did not take any further action.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Russia blocks Srebrenica genocide resolution

# data[].attributes.body
Anna Kaufman

Period 4

Theme Number: 1

Institutional shortcomings contributed to grave UN peacekeeping failures in both Rwanda and Bosnia. First, UN peacekeepers are held to a strict mandate to only use force in self-defense or to help evacuate foreigners. Second, the UN failed to train peacekeepers to negotiate with perpetrators of violence against civilians. Similarly, there existed a cultural disconnect between the training peacekeepers received and the reality of local communities.

Failures and Successes of the UN

The Alliance for Citizen Engagement, Katelyn Balakir.

https://ace-usa.org/blog/research/research-foreignpolicy/failures-and-successes-of-the-un/

This report, based on an investigation by Human Rights Watch/Helsinki representatives from July 31 to August 23, records the events leading up to, during and immediately after the fall of the Srebrenica “safe area,” including gross violations of humanitarian law, as has been typical of Bosnian Serb military conduct to date. Abuses attending the occupation of the “safe area” included the terrorization of women, children and the elderly and the premeditated mass executions of men and boys. The trek through Bosnian Serb-controlled territory that men fleeing the enclave hoped would lead them to safety instead led to ambushes and executions of hundreds and possibly thousands of men in numerous locations. We have based our accounts of these atrocities on the testimony of survivors who have identified locations and sites of mass executions both within the Srebrenica region and in various areas stretching between Bosnian Serb-controlled and Bosnian government-controlled territory.

We report on the mishandling of the crisis by the U.N.’s Bosnia peacekeeping force UNPROFOR/UNPF — from the craven decisions of its field commanders prior to the fall of Srebrenica, to its apparent suppression and destruction of evidence of massive human rights abuses immediately after the fall of the “safe area.”[3] We also report on the Dutch Defense Ministry’s “mislaying” of a crucial list of missing Bosnian men and boys and its destruction of a video tape showing Bosnian Serb soldiers engaged in extrajudicial executions as Dutch U.N. troops looked on.

The Fall of Srebrenica and the Failure of UN Peacekeeping

Human Rights Watch

https://www.hrw.org/report/1995/10/15/fall-srebrenica-and-failure-un-peacekeeping/bosnia-and-herzegovina

Reflection: It's clear that the UN failed to intervene in the Bosnian War. It seems that the role they played in the war was unclear because they really did nothing to support those involved or help to stop the conflict. They did not make even the slightest impact which was very disappointing.

In the first source I provided, it mentions how the UN failed to train peacekeepers to negotiate with perpetrators of violence against civilians. That is the bare minimum that they could have done to made an impact.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
How was the United Nations involved in Bosnian peacekeeping? - Choices Program

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
History and Current Issues Curriculum for the Classroom

# data[].attributes.body
Shawn Elwood

Pd: 4

Theme Number: 1

"In a series of resolutions and statements, the Security Council appealed to all parties to bring about a cease-fire and a negotiated political solution, and demanded, inter alia, that all forms of interference from outside Bosnia and Herzegovina, including by JNA, as well as by the Croatian Army, cease immediately and that all local irregular forces be disbanded and disarmed."

Former Yugoslavia - UNPROFOR

Department of Public Information, United Nations

https://peacekeeping.un.org/en/mission/past/unprof_b.htm

"The international response to this campaign was create “Safe Areas” in which Bosniak civilians were to be protected from Serbian militias.  The militias, however, targeted the Safe Areas anyway. Most notoriously, a Serbian militia overran the Safe Area of the town of Srebenica, leading the mostly Bosniak civilian population to seek refuge at the United Nations’ base nearby.  There, however, forces led by the militia leader Ratko Mladic convinced the UN forces to allow them to separate the men from the women and children.  The latter were deported to the zone controlled by Bosniak forces.  The former, numbering over 7,000, were massacred."

Yugoslavia (Former)

Genocide Study Program - Yale University

https://gsp.yale.edu/case-studies/yugoslavia-former

Reflection: When looking for sources I found it interesting that there were conflicting sources, that make sense in the context of the videos we watched on this conflict. The first source which is from the UN states the conclusion of their efforts to make peace and push for a cease fire. Although the UN states this in their document recapping the event, there are other sources that talk about the people's side of it. This source shows what happened when the UN failed to deliver their promise of protection through establishing a safe area. Together the sources aren't exactly connected to each other but they contrast each other by showing both sides of the conflict.

# data[].attributes.body
Student: Bryan Yuman

Period:4

Theme: How the War in Bosnia Ended

This article talks about how the war in Bosnia was like and how many people were affected by it "For over four years, the breakup of Yugoslavia and the start of war, in Croatia and in Bosnia, the United States refused to take the lead in trying to end the violence and conflict. and the West’s failure to stop the ethnic cleansing, the concentration camps, and the massacres of hundreds of thousands of civilians," Many men were hunted in the war. "First, a large-scale attack on the three eastern Muslim enclaves of Srebrenica, Ze pa, and Gorazde—each an international ‘safe’ area lightly protected by a token U.N. presence—would swiftly capture these Muslim outposts in Serb-controlled Bosnian territory."

Video:
Fears of new conflict as Bosnia-Herzegovina faces growing ...

www.youtube.com › watch

Reflection: The article provides a compelling narrative of the United States' involvement in the Bosnian conflict and the eventual resolution through the Dayton Peace Accords in 1995. It delves into the complexities of policy-making and the shifting dynamics that led to a decisive change in approach by the Clinton administration.

One of the key insights from the article is the acknowledgment of the failures and shortcomings in the initial approach towards Bosnia.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Future Wars: Will there be another Bosnian war?

# data[].attributes.body
https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/central-european-history/article/abs/war-trauma-and-the-politics-of-ptsd-during-and-after-the-wars-of-yugoslav-succession/17EFF9635E3FABB139A3A8FDDF747E2F

student name: robinson

period:4

post-traumatic stress disorder was developed and debated during the wars of Yugoslav succession 1991–1995. It focuses on the rich, wide-ranging, and complex psychiatric and psychotherapeutic discussions of war trauma in the post-Yugoslav space, arguing that arguments about PTSD became a site for expressing political tensions, controversies, and anxieties that could not otherwise be addressed or identified.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
and , Traumatic Pasts: History, Psychiatry, and Trauma in the Modern Age, 1870-1930 (Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press, 2009), The Harmony of Illusions: Inventing Post-traumatic Stress Disorder (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1995), PTSD: A Short History (Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2018) Google Scholar. On the political and intellectual history of PTSD, see Google Scholar; ; Google Scholar.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
"War Trauma" and the Politics of PTSD during and after the Wars of Yugoslav Succession | Central European History | Cambridge Core

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
"War Trauma" and the Politics of PTSD during and after the Wars of Yugoslav Succession - Volume 55 Issue 2

# data[].attributes.body
"President Clinton took his case for U.S. involvement in Bosnia to the American people. Speaking from the Oval Office, Clinton said that U.S. diplomacy had produced the Dayton Accords and that U.S. troops had been requested to help the parties implement the peace plan. He said peace in the Balkans was in America’s interest and he assured the American people that, since 25 other nations had already agreed to participate in a force of 60,000, only a third of the troops would be Americans.

The General Framework Agreement, including 11 annexes, was signed formally in Paris on December 14 by the parties and by witnesses President Clinton, French President Jacques Chirac, British Prime Minister John Major, German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, and Russian Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin. The agreement called for Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia, and the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia to agree to fully respect the sovereign equality of one another and to settle disputes by peaceful means."

Clinton, B. (2024, January 9). Dayton Accords. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/event/Dayton-Accords

"President Bush was wary, fearing that European efforts to forge a common security role would undercut NATO and by extension Washington’s voice in the continent’s affairs. Over French objections, he forged consensus for a Rapid Reaction Corps under integrated NATO command, which would allow the alliance to undertake missions “out of area”.

“We don’t want to put a dog in this fight”

When Serbia’s Slobodan Milošević — convinced NATO would not stand in his way — ordered the Yugoslav army into Croatia and Slovenia in the spring of 1991, the American failure to prevent the war emboldened the European Community to forge an independent path.

Speaking on behalf of the then-twelve member states, Luxembourg’s foreign minister, Jacques Poos declared, “This is the hour of Europe, not the hour of the Americans… If one problem can be solved by the Europeans, it is the Yugoslav problem. This is a European country and it is not up to the Americans.”

President Bush was content to leave the problem to the Europeans."

"The United States agreed to coordinate transatlantic consultations on Yugoslavia through channels with the European Community. The North Atlantic Cooperation Council defined the conflict in Yugoslavia as “out of area”, and thus outside NATO’s scope."

Bush’s Ambivalent Yugoslavia Policy Shaped Transatlantic Relations for Decade – Atlantic Sentinel. (2018, December 7). https://atlanticsentinel.com/2018/12/bushs-ambivalent-yugoslavia-policy-shaped-transatlantic-relations-for-decade/

Reflection:

In the inital peace treaty of the Dayton Acords, (Dec 14) President Clinton of the U.S., and other country leaders gathered together to form a solution to the war in Bosnia. This agreement included 25 nations including the U.S. to develop a system around agreeing upon "the sovereign equality of one another and to settle disputes by peaceful means."(Britanica). While this system seemed a good plan for the country to contuine living in peace, the plan wasn't entirely flawless. The U.S. presidency of George Bush, time had gone by and he decided the America should not countine to be apart of the agreement. He felt it was not our place to interven, "“I’ve told our top people, ‘We don’t want to put a dog in this fight,'” he wrote in his diary on July 1. “It’s not one that we have to mastermind… This concept that we have to work out every problem, everywhere in the word, is crazy.”" (Atlantic Sentinel), stated President Bush. Countries within Europe also did not feel the need for America to be apart of the issue, and wanted the U.S. out. America felt they were interferring to much into a conflict, which goes against Washingtons words, while Europe wanted to forge a common security role. This goes to show that although in the start of the resolution plan, it may have seemed the U.S. needed to be invovled in the Bosnia War, but was later found that it was better to keep to our self and inital American values.

‌

# data[].attributes.body
Leah Bornstein

Period: 4

Theme number: 1

"The failure of the United Nations in Bosnia is evident due to its inability to successfully stop the violence before the death toll escalated to 200,000. Innocent people suffered for years as the Serbs raped, tortured, and killed Bosnian Muslims throughout the region from 1992 until 1995. The Serbs were uncooperative and they presented the UN with countless obstacles, which essentially placed the UN in a no-win situation"

Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing: An Analysis on the Role of the United Nations during the Bosnian War, Iman Zekri, https://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1054&context=ureca#:~:text=During%20the%20conflict%20in%20Bosnia,permitted%20the%20conflict%20to%20persist.

“When the Croatian and Serb proxies were ambushing the Bosniaks from all corners, it [the UN] failed to condemn both Serbia and Croatia as aggressors in the war. As the Bosniak (Bosnian Muslim) community was being shelled and raped, and the fundamental values of its inception were being violated, the UN failed to immediately deploy an Emergency Peacekeeping Force to the country to halt the ongoing carnage. It found itself unable to secure a lasting ceasefire between the two major warring parties, i.e., the Bosnian Serbs and Bosniak. The notion of collective security was torn apart by the aggressors as the victims and survivors fell prey to ethnic violence, violation of human rights, and subsequent genocide, with the UN unwilling to come to their aid.”

An avoidable fallout: A case study of the UN’s failure in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Kidwai, Saman Ayesha

https://www.ia-forum.org/Content/ViewInternal_Document.cfm?contenttype_id=0&ContentID=8934

Reflection:

Due to the lack of help and leadership in the early 1990s, the United Nations' failed to preserve peace in Bosnia during the war. The UN did not step up to do their job which resulted in many Yugoslavians suffering. The UN's peacekeeping mission in Bosnia, known as UNPROFOR, had a limited mandate and lacked the resources, authority, and clear rules of engagement to effectively protect civilians and enforce peace agreements. Secondly, the UN Security Council also made an attempt to manage Serb aerial assaults by proclaiming Bosnia a Zekri 10 no-fly zone (digitalcommons.unl.edu). In addition, the UN initially underestimated the conditions and violence being committed, leading to a delayed and inadequate response. The main purpose of the UN is to maintain international peace and security. Therefore, it was not fulfilled during the mass murders and violence that took place in Yugoslavia in the 1990s.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The UN and the Breakup of Yugoslavia: A Reassessment

# data[].attributes.body
Jackson Lipsey

Period 4

Theme 1

"In 1946 the Yugoslavian communism or Yugoslavianism had taken its hold on the country during WW2. Despite the world view of communism not being very good it united the country for many years. Once the communist leader died, the party began to lose the power and piece they had had. This plunged the country into controversy and blamed the other side."

"The average yugoslavian believed entirely in the media which caused many problems at the time. This also gave power to any group that controlled the media with selective journalism. The media battle started many years before the actual war began and was in a way the catalyst towards the actual collapse of the country. By presenting both sides of a crime gives “equality” to both sides so it doesn't seem like you are favoring one over the other. It encourages greater empathy, open-mindedness and an appreciation of difference and diversity. So by not doing so it's just the opposite. There is always more than one side to a story."

Reflection: The UN has to make the difficult decisions to maintain over all peace and stability and the decisions sometimes lead to unforeseen consequences. Despite these challenges, it is essential to recognize the UN's invaluable contributions to global governance and peacekeeping efforts. While it may fall short of idealistic expectations, the UN remains a vital forum for dialogue, cooperation, and conflict resolution on the world stage. Moving forward, efforts to reform and strengthen the UN should focus on enhancing its responsiveness, accountability, and capacity to address emerging global challenges effectively. Only through collective action and unwavering commitment can the UN fulfill its mission of promoting peace, prosperity, and human dignity for all.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
The U.N is a Failing Institution | Dr Miranda Brown | 5 of 8

# data[].attributes.body
Student Name: Timmy Collins

Period: 4

Theme Number: 2

"The available evidence shows that after not intervening in Rwanda, Clinton evolved toward a more assertive foreign policy. Clinton eventually fought against pressures to employ a containment strategy in Bosnia, pushed to lift the arms embargo on the Bosnian Muslims, and strike at the Bosnian Serbs. After multiple failed attempts at diplomacy to accomplish these goals, Clinton managed to achieve his objectives through indirect methods. He set the stage for a major military offensive against Bosnian Serb forces before the massacre at Srebrenica, which is an important correction to the traditional narrative on the topic. Clinton then initiated a massive U.S.-led bombing campaign, achieved military objectives, negotiated a peace agreement, and deployed U.S. troops to enforce the peace agreement"

PRESIDENT CLINTON'S INTERVENTION INTO BOSNIA, 1995: An Evolution in Foreign Policy Decision Making, Sage Journals, Eric James Szandzik,

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/00438200231155197?icid=int.sj-abstract.citing-articles.1#:~:text=Clinton%20eventually%20fought%20against%20pressures,his%20objectives%20through%20indirect%20methods.

"Both administrations had some commonalities such as the Wilsonian dynamic of democracy promotion; both had a war on terror, they both fought wars of choice in Kosovo in the case of Clinton and Iraq in the case of Bush. However, there were some very striking differences. Clinton was a strong believer in multilateralism while Bush believed in American hegemony and Unilateralism. Clinton’s actions were mostly fueled by public opinion whereas Bush did not care for public opinion. Clinton sought to promote stability while Bush sought to freedom at the expense of stability. Clinton rhetoric when speaking the world was convivial while Bush’s was viewed as provocation."

Comparing the Foreign Policy Doctrines of Bill Clinton and George W. Bush, E-International Relations, Marcella Berkeley Gill,

https://www.e-ir.info/2017/04/14/comparing-the-foreign-policy-doctrines-of-bill-clinton-and-george-w-bush/

Reflection:

As leadership in America shifted from Bush to Clinton, so did its US policy in Bosnia. One main difference in the policies of Bush and Clinton was while Clinton's actions were mostly influenced by public opinion, Bush's weren't. Also, Bush's policies in Bosnia focused on freedom for the citizens, while Clinton's focused on stability for their government. Bush's approach did not look to be effective. Clinton believed that America needed to be more active in Bosnia after not intervening in Rwanda in order to reaffirm America's power and influence. After military intervention Clinton was about to set up peace negotiations which he enforced with a further show of American might.