"Holbrooke and his team landed in the Croatian

coastal city of Split, where they briefed

the Bosnian foreign minister, Muhamed Sacirbey,

on our plans. Sacirbey was the eloquent public face

of Bosnia on American television, a handsome,

fit man who, as a student in the United States had

been a starting football player at Tulane University.

He had long sought greater American involvement

in his beleaguered nation and was glad

the hour had finally come."

President Bill Clinton in "My Life"

on Muhamed Sacirbey.Page 668.

TRUTH BETWEEN TEAMMATES OR POLITICAL RIVALS

Truth is the inevitable victim of time, as much as our memory is of aging. Sometimes it is coincidental. President Bill Clinton probably had no personal interest in promoting me into a star on the football team at Tulane when I was merely a good athlete on scholarship on a team of mostly great talents. Since President Bill Clinton and I had met on a variety of occasions, and he genially referred to me as "Ambassador Mo," President Bill Clinton probably was just trying to be gracious to me in assumptions he included in his recollections. I should not and cannot be upset with him, but I do not look forward to my many teammates at Tulane mistaking me for a braggart. One of the ten commandments of a football locker room is that a good player should never claim greater talents or achievements than that accorded him by his teammates.

Obviously that commandment is shunned in politics, even viewed as a shortcoming. Politics allows for significant leeway for exaggeration and self promotion, and the rest of the "political locker room" assume it as a legitimate part of the game, at least until it actually gets so big that it can trip up the one running with it. Maybe I'm a bit prudish on this point, but this tendency and acceptance of self promotion also indicates an unspoken disdain for the egalitarian ideal.

INNOCENT CASUALTIES OF MY TRUTH

Many ordinary citizens, from children to grandmothers, in Bosnia-Herzegovina came under fire from snipers. I came under fire on numerous occasions from mortars and snipers. What is most lasting about my experience for me is that on at least two occasions, two innocents were indiscriminately killed because they happened to be in the wrong place when I was being targeted. A woman gathering fire wood was torn apart by a mortar shell aimed at me and my bodyguard as I descended toward the tunnel that was Sarajevo's lifeline. A news reporter was killed by a guided explosive as he waited for me to arrive for an interview at the entrance to the bunkered Sarajevo TV building, after one of my body guards inadvertently revealed over "Motorola walkie-talkies" that I was on my way.

I'm certain that they were not the only casualties that took one inadvertently because of me. I was fortunate, and they were not. I was there by choice, duty or otherwise, and I could select my way. They just happened to be innocent victims with many fewer choices than me, and as many citizens of Bosnia & Herzegovina, at that time, they suffered and many did not survive a war that was thrust upon them.

I really do not begrudge Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton the "misstatement" of "sniper

fire" upon her landing in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Even as the Dayton Accords were concluded, in Sarajevo a Serbian fired missile from the surrounding hills tore through a tram, and its civilian occupants, just resuming operations. Around the same time, on my way out of Sarajevo with General Wes Clark and several US diplomats, our US Air Force plane took

evasive action presumably because of real or potential ground fire. Perhaps Senator Clinton more accurately remembered her heightened sense of being a potential target as her plane approached Bosnia-Herzegovina rather than the greeting of the dignitaries, the young girl and several teenagers, on the tarmac. What I only wish now is that Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton would also recall the plight of this young Bosnian girl and so many others who were for almost four years the victims of sniper fire, shelling, deprivation and genocide. Toward the end of the war in 1995, a gathering place for teenagers in Tuzla, Hillary's destination in BiH, was targeted by mortars. Dozens were killed and more maimed. I would hope that Senator Clinton and the American political establishment would recall their truth, of all the innocent victims who have not even breached the edges of this political story.

AN APOLOGY TO THE VICTIMS IN RWANDA

President Bill Clinton traveled to Rwanda and apologized to the victims of genocide for America's and the world's failure to confront this crime as it was occurring. The United States has never been so forthcoming in Bosnia-Herzegovina, though President Bill Clinton has traveled to Bosnia & Herzegovina to express his commiseration. The fundamental difference is that the victims of genocide in Rwanda eventually prevailed, and they wrote the truth of their victimization. History belongs to the victor.

In Bosnia-Herzegovina the terms of the peace have been effectively dictated and imposed by the global powers, in particular the United States. Some have tried to claim victory, mainly individuals, outside officials who take credit for the Dayton Accords. The United States deserves credit for having finally stepped in to help end the war, but it also shares responsibility for the nature of the peace. As welcome as peace is, it has so far failed to counter the outcome of genocide. In effect, the Dayton Accords have been misappropriated now to legitimize and exploit the consequences of genocide.

Having failed to confront genocide initially and its consequences, Washington and the global Big Powers are now inclined to marginalize or prevaricate the crime committed. They have reshaped history to accommodate equivocation or even acquiescence. The newly drafted terminology no longer defines it as aggression against a member state or genocide, but rather a civil war and age old hatreds. The wicked are made to look not so bad while the defenders of Bosnia are blemished as to draw at least a measure of equivilancy.

The International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia, (ICTY), has already reached its own judgment. Unfortunately such credible ICTY judgments have as yet to be enforced in a political and human context as to be definitive in shaping the vision of the future or even the perspective of the past. Rather, writing history has been claimed as the exclusive domain of those who would now rationalize the flawed status quo in the region, and in Bosnia-Herzegovina in particular.

"THE 1995 (DAYTON ACCORDS) CREATED THE INDEPENDENT STATE OF BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA"

This claim was posted on the official website of the State Department "Country Report on Human Rights and Practices 2005." It was the same for several previous years dating back to the late 1990's.

Bosnia-Herzegovina was established by referendum, (as was its prerogative as a Federal unit of the former Yugoslavia), and recognized as an independent state in 1992. It was admitted to the United Nations in May 22, 1992, (when I became BiH's first ambassador to this global family organization). Bosnia-Herzegovina also has its own distinguished history, as an independent, sovereign mid and Renaissance age kingdom and as a demarcated province in the Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian Empires. From 1992 to 1995, Bosnia & Herzegovina was defended and ultimately preserved by the will and selfless sacrifice of citizen soldiers. Outgunned and initially surprised by the onslaught. Bosnia-Herzegovina was thought by most to be destined to the history heap of subjugated states, but it fought back and survived. Liberation did not come through military victory, even though today in hindsight it appears to have been ultimately realizable. Instead, we the leadership of Bosnia-Herzegovina, (including I as Foreign Minister), opted for a negotiated peace, even if it was with a brutal enemy. The human and ideological costs of continued war dwarfed the immediate unpleasantness of dealing with people like Milosevic and Kraisnik, who were destined to be indicted. We thought that we had the right to expect that with Milosevic, Mladic and Karadzic gone, the fruits of their crime, ethnic cleansing and its bastion, the "Republika Srpska" as such defined entity within Bosnia-Herzegovina, would also be passing. Certainly we thought that we had the right to expect that the Euro-Atlantic democracies would promote a progressive transition. Regardless, before and during the Dayton Accords, we made certain and it was legally clear that: Bosnia-Herzegovina was re-established as a sovereign state in 1992 and has continuity of sovereign and territorial integrity till the current period without interruption.

The State Department corrected this overreaching claim after my protests and the Congress of North American Bosniaks. Nonetheless, it is worthy of further examination as to whether the State Department's overreaching is part of an implicit or explicit effort to marginalize Bosnia & Herzegovina's sovereignty and territorial integrity and particularly the credit for defending such. Was this intended to translate into taking greater prerogative with Bosnia-Herzegovina's political future? Or, was this a matter of personal legacy dictating over good history, legality and strategic policy?

It is no secret that many have tried to claim Bosnia & Herzegovina, and particularly the Dayton Accords, as their success. Legacies, now more like myths, are built upon this underpinning. This shaky foundation though has a sharp, even if rusty edge, to cut the handler.

The State Department, to its credit, and others have now recognized the mistake. The above ambiguity of implicitly bringing together the "creation" of the state of Bosnia & Herzegovina and the genocidal bastion, Republika Srpska into the same international document, has had the effect of emboldening Srpska separatists and eroding Bosnia-Herzegovina's status. It has undermined progressive internal reintegration and BiH's ultimate inclusion as full partner in Euro-Atlantic family of states.

WITH CREDIT COMES ONGOING RESPONSIBILITY AND ACCOUNTABILITY

My advice to all Presidential candidates: Do not employ Bosnia-Herzegovina as an example of a timely, principled or lasting response. It is not a healthy precedent for other global hotspots. While some, including Ambassador Richard Holbrooke have made the Dayton Accords their political and personal calling card, this does not equate to either a desirable or lasting solution. It should not dictate the current policy of the United States and other democratic powers. Accepting accountability for past failures and flaws is complimentary with taking credit for that which is good. Responsibility demands an objective evaluation and affirmative steps to remedy.

Presidential candidate Hillary Clinton has more than

once invoked her personal experience of going to

Bosnia, as well as the credit accorded to her husband's

administration in ending the war. (Unlike Holbrooke,

former Secretary of State Madeline Albright, also part

of Hillary's team, and former Clinton Security Adviser

Tony Lake, part of Obama's team, have not been so

vocal in invoking the legacy of Dayton). I do not

begrudge Senator Clinton summoning Bosnia & Herzegovina as an element of her foreign policy experience. I do not even judge her harshly for her

flawed memory about the flight in 1996. All novices to

that environment were conscious of the reputation and the risks that had persisted for four years. (I recall that a year later in 1997 as I was hosting U2 for their concert in Sarajevo, there was much talk regarding risks of snipers and mortars even if the military action had ended almost two years earlier. Simply put, the brutal image that had become engrained from 1992-1995 defied a new reality of relative even if deficient peace. U2's concert was a great success for the country and region. It was to be a signal that not only peace but a new era of hope was really upon us. Rather than stand guard, thousands of NATO and peacekeeping troops joined the concert as fans and celebrants).

So, why should Presidential Candidate Hillary Clinton not celebrate Bosnia as a success? Unfortunately the hope that accompanied her visit in 1996 and that spilled over the country and region in 1997, has not prevailed in the implementation of the Dayton Accords. Refugees, victims of ethnic cleansing still largely have not returned to their homes. Indicted war criminals have not been arrested over a dozen years later, apparently with acquiescence from the "secret services" of certain Big Powers. (Just read Florence Hartmann and Carla del Ponte). Ultranationalist politics have been legitimized rather than marginalized, and ethnic chauvinism is driving the country toward a feudal delineation. While Bosnia-Herzegovina has become part of the veneer in the US Presidential campaign, it is the substance of the story that would be more telling in the reasons for the failures and successes of recent US and Euro-Atlantic foreign policy.

COULD HAVE BEEN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR COHESION OF POLITICAL VALUES RATHER THAN A RALLYING CRY FOR RELIGIOUS EXTREMISM

Simply put, Bosnia-Herzegovina now has become an example of lost opportunity, if not outright failure for the second time in recent history. In 1992, the Euro-Atlantic powers allowed Milosevic's regime to orchestrate a campaign of ethnic cleansing, genocide, while the internationally recognized government of Bosnia-Herzegovina was kept artificially defenseless on the basis of an illegitimate, non-discerning arms embargo. The state and people of BiH survived contrary to expectation and by the will of its citizen soldiers. Dayton did not save Bosnia-Herzegovina. It was though envisioned to allow peace to carry its momentum toward a progressive, reintegrated state.

That has not been the reality though. After more than a dozen years of in effect Euro-Atlantic administration, there is now the realization of a second failure. And please do not buy the story that it is the Bosnians fault. This second failure is defined by hesitancy to even modestly reverse the consequences of ethnic cleansing and challenge the ultranationalists of Republika Srpska. Of course, you will not find this version of the current situation in any official report or mainstream media. It might start to surface, but then would be shot down in favor of a rewriting of history.

ADVICE FROM AN ODL COUNTRY AND WESTERN SONG

If you review more closely the Youtube video of Hillary's landing not under sniper fire in Bosnia & Herzegovina, you would notice several US diplomats accompanying her. They include some important players who graduated from the Bosnia experience, including Chris Hill of North Korea nuke talks fame. Whether they discussed or revealed Hillary's mistaken memory, I cannot attest. But, this is when I recall the old country and western song by Jerry Jeff Walker with the critical advice: "do not piss into the wind!" Hillary's "misstatement" was bared only because there are other Presidential candidates who have an interest, and most critically the effective power to counter her official version of history.

It is sad for any state when its history becomes the punch line in a Big Powers political campaign. It is certainly not the way for the United States to review and manage its foreign policy. However, I must make one final admission here: I and several former and current BiH officials knew from the outset, when Presidential candidate Hillary first spoke of her trip to Bosnia under sniper fire a month or so ago that, inadvertently or otherwise, she was not accurate. However, we kept silent. Most were just happy that Bosnia-Herzegovina was even a topic of the Presidential elections. Of course, most also knew that if they said something with the best of motives, it nonetheless would most likely have the effect of pissing into the wind!
  

Muhamed Sacirbey

--------------------

Mr. Muhamed Sacirbey holds B.A. degree in history and J. D. degree from Tulane University in New Orleans. He also holds M.B.A. degree from Columbia University. Prior to becoming Bosnia’s Foreign Minister and Ambassador to the United Nations, he practiced as an attorney in New York City and worked for several years as an investment banker. He presently writes his book “A Convenient Genocide, in a fishbowl ” and is a commentator on human rights and political issues.

--------------------