War is brutal as it results in chaos, destruction, deaths, and enmity that may last for centuries. The Yugoslavia war following the end of the Cold War was one of the wars that would result in a Hitler-like strategy of ethnic cleansing in the region following the death of the Yugoslavian influential leader, Marshal Tito. The lack of other leaders to rise and ensure the solidarity of the large area resulted in Croatia, Slovenia, Macedonia, and Bosnia-Herzegovina declaring themselves as independent states away from Yugoslavia. Communism had been defeated in WWII, and with the destruction of the Berlin Wall that resulted in united Germany at the end of the Cold War, it was believed that Europe would be strong enough to deal with their internal issues. However, the genocide in Bosnia & Herzegovina with hundreds of thousands running from their homes due to the ethnic cleansing 1 , led to the need for the U.S. to intervene and end the war.
The book, “To End a War” by Richard Holbrooke is a vivid description by Holbrooke who was the mediator as he recalls the challenges and events he and his team encountered to end the war which led to the signing of the Dayton Agreement that would play an integral role in the recognition and unity of Bosnia and Herzegovina. This review is a critique of the information shared by Holbrooke in the quick peace negotiation among the conflicting parties, which will help to determine whether the techniques he used to achieve the peace were worth or unethical even with their success. The solution to war and conflict can be solved through different ways such as diplomacy, the victory of one party and the submission of the losing party among other means. Holbrooke who had become one of the best American negotiators was tasked with the role of leading his team and those from European nations as an external negotiator. He employed shuttle diplomacy and some radical means such as the radical threats of attacks to win. These are some of the issues that will be reviewed later in the paper.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Summary
The book is written in the first person as Holbrooke intends to demonstrate his knowledge on the events as they were undergone in the hectic rush since following President Clinton choice to appoint him and his team to engage in the negotiations to end the mass killings mainly in Bosnia Herzegovina between 1992 and 1994. The state of the region that was a former communist region was torn into shreds with use of modern weaponry dominating the region. It is evident that the Serbian and Croatian president, Slobodan Milosevic and Franjo Tudjman had considered on dividing the Bosnian land amongst the two countries and the Bosnian Croats and Muslim Serbs in the country conflicted with the Muslim depicted as radicals who needed to be eliminated for peace to be achieved.
The journey to meet the two presidents was tricky for Holbrooke and his team as after meeting Tudjman in Zagreb, they had to travel through Mount Igman to start their negotiations with Milosevic. According to the author, “The Mount Igman route to Sarajevo was often described as the most dangerous road in Europe.” 2 The Serb machine gunners were known for their often killing and bombing U.N. vehicles, and the narrowness and steep hill increased the danger as vehicles would spin downhill with no way to be retrieved. This zone was a death zone for everyone that was not a supporter of these Serb machine gunners. Holbrooke would lose three of his most influential team members, Frasure, Kruzel, and Drew, along the road after a landslide had led to an accident in the armored vehicle they were traveling in and land mines going off and nowhere for the team and French peacekeepers to run or hide. The journey towards peace seemed to have failed before it began but Holbrooke was not about to quit. The incidents at the beginning are gripping and depict the dangerous situations and incidents that were dominating the region.
The author also demonstrates the different leadership and governance preferred by the different leaders with their characteristics. For instance, following his first meeting with Milosevic as, “smart, evasive and tricky…he was playing word games devoid of substance focusing on inconsequential changes…his goal remained to get the sanctions lifted at no cost.” 3 . The three leaders of Serbia, Bosnia, and Croatia were determined to jeopardize the negotiations by breaking previous agreements and using brutality and the media to justify their genocidal activities even as the activities continued. For instance, Bosnian Muslims were depicted as radicals who were victimizing their neighbors whereas they were the victims. Holbrooke described the saddening images of killing and chasing away Muslim while they were still depicted as the enemies even to the international world by channels such as CNN 4 . He demonstrated the influence of the media and literature that claimed that the only way to solve the issue was through an internal agreement in Yugoslavia. It was a delusion and wrong assumption that would result in the Kijevo mass killing and the decision of Germany to recognize Croatia as an independent nation would make this worse than it was thought.
According to Alija Izetbegovic, as quoted in the book, the Bosnian president claimed that “But for that peace in Bosnia-Herzegovina I would not sacrifice sovereignty” 5 . Holbrooke demonstrated the failures of an earlier intervention of NATO and the Bush administration which had made the issue to progress to such heights. The use of shuttle diplomacy and threat to bomb the Bosnia-Serb army if they did not move from Bosnia-Herzegovina as the borders created whereby Croatia and Serbia had to give up some land to establish the Bosnia-Herzegovina and signing of the Dayton Accord.
Critique
The essence that he was motivated to work tireless to ensure that people who had propagated the mass killings of over 200,000 and three million refugees 6 , it is quite confusing that all along the entire process towards peace and signing of the Dayton Accord, his choice of words demonstrate that he and Milosevic got along. He had earlier claimed that Milosevic had played the most prominent role in causing the war, but that did not stop Holbrooke to engage and have high respect for him. These actions and his unwillingness to communicate even for a single time with Bosnian Muslim leader even though he was an external mediator that needed to negotiate with all leaders.
He may have called against the discrimination of the Muslims condemning the Serbs and Croats depiction of the Muslims, but it is evident that he dined and joke with this perpetrators. His description of Izetbegovic as a Mao Zedong and other Chinese radical communist leaders good at revolution and poor at governance is a depiction of his disrespect to the Islamic leader whereas he only demonstrated Milosevic as a hero. For instance, following the mapping of the country, Holbrooke asks Milosevic the reason he was laughing, he stated “Because he is in a coma after seeing the map” 7 which seems like a joke to him and Holbrooke never refutes this disgusting answer.
Before the signing of the Accord, the Bosnian Serbs kill Muslims but with the deal almost to be signed, Holbrooke does not condemn the actions of Milosevic but he was the first person to condemn the earlier killings stating that they demonstrated the lack of American influence that was needed to solve issues even in the European nations. His actions demonstrate ego and discrediting the activities of others who had failed through a diplomatic means to an end the war. He may have ended the war but did not bring peace and reconciliation because millions of the refugees have never returned to their homeland.
The use of the first person in the book and the failure to describe his failures as a shortcoming of being too egocentric to listen to other people shows that he believed that diplomacy was for cowards. He stated that he was humiliated by the NATO commanders who were not ready to deploy soldiers to dismantle the Bosnia Serb thugs as he called them (Holbrooke 6461). NATO would aid eliminating the threat of the militia in Pale and help in the formation of Bosnian Serb government after arresting the war criminals in Banja Luka.
Personal Response
The essence that he was a negotiator even in Vietnam, his reasoning and rush decision to engage in a radical form of negotiations. Such as sanctions from the U.S. or force the parties to negotiate through use of military prowess is a call for concern that may demonstrate that the aggressive nature was not to help the natives but to boost his credentials as the person who ended the Yugoslavia war. He may have succeeded, but free will and enmity were never eradicated in these regions. The disregard of the Paris negotiations and other diplomatic attempts is distressing and shows that he needed to consider the efforts of others but according to the book discredit of such events means that his way was the only way to solve the issues. He seems to demonstrate that everything that is not led or brokered by the U.S. is unworthy to him. His high belief of the strength of America to negotiate and ensure international problems are solved is a depiction of patriotism but he also discontent with the Congress and Senate among other leaders is questionable. The book was informative and quite enticing in different parts such as the beginning, but the naming of multiple people he encountered or had contact with led to confusion. By the time I finished reading the book, it was impossible to remember half of the names and their relationship with the author. Unlike other books in the war genre, it lacks continue the thrilling action, but it is unique in its descriptive nature.
Conclusion
Holbrooke’s book demonstrates the challenges of engaging in diplomacy. The Yugoslavia War caused genocides, but the European and NATO did nothing from limiting the escalation of violence. Three years later, Holbrooke and his team which also included European negotiators and ministers faced many problems with some of them dying, but they were not deterred by such events and continued to engage in negotiation of peace. The methods used may have been too aggressive for most conservative liking, but the ability of Holbrooke to employ all his imagination and power invested in him ended the war and provided the basis of signing the Dayton Accords. The book depicted both the brilliance and egocentric characters of the Holbrooke, but his insight in the book depicted a chronology of events as they happened which is necessary for understanding the Yugoslavia war and the foundation of independent Bosnia-Herzegovina.
Bibliography
Holbrooke, Richard C. To End a War : The Conflict in Yugoslavia---America Inside . New York: Modern Library, 1998. Kindle Book.
1 Holbrooke, Richard C. To End a War : The Conflict in Yugoslavia---America Inside . New York: Modern Library, 1998. Kindle Book.
2 Holbrooke, Richard C. To End a War : The Conflict in Yugoslavia---America Inside . New York: Modern Library, 1998. Kindle Book.
3 Holbrooke, Richard C. To End a War : The Conflict in Yugoslavia---America Inside . New York: Modern Library, 1998. Kindle Book.
4 Ibid.
5 Holbrooke, Richard C. To End a War : The Conflict in Yugoslavia---America Inside . New York: Modern Library, 1998. Kindle Book.
6 Ibid.
7 Holbrooke, Richard C. To End a War : The Conflict in Yugoslavia---America Inside . New York: Modern Library, 1998. Kindle Book.
