There are a few caveats. The US cares about its credibiltiy. If we're somehow a stakeholder (I don't believe we are much) we will often extend our pursuit of a policy. Even a flawed policy. Then there's the whole regional stability issue. If we see, say, strong Russian backing for Serb militancy in getting its way without regard to other nationalities, then it becomes a great power game. At that point, we cannot remain neutral. If tanks start rolling across frontiers, I think we'd offer aid, but not troops, and I am certain we'd have words with Moscow about that beforehand. Our standing in the Muslim world is also another consideration (though I believe this a deeply flawed analysis). It has been pointed out that our supposed help (I seem to remember an arms embargo) of the Muslim community in the FRY can be used to counter the theme in the Middle East that America hates Islam.
As long as Serbs, Kosovars, Bosniaks, Croats, etc., intend to work out their own issues without too much violence, I think the US would be content to stay out of it.
I also believe we'd be more than happy at this point to let the Europeans field this one with our support, but without our direction.
It'd take some real nastiness for the US to take its eyes of itself, which usually is where they like to focus anyways. Remember, democrats still have political momentum (a little), and that means the policy focus will be mostly domestic (jobs, education, healthcare, the economy, restoring trust in banking and business, etc.). Blame 9/11 for making Americans feel as if security is a major domestic issue. That's what has Obama on the news from Europe, the Middle East, etc. Otherwise, that would be buried on page 9 or something.
In the US, nobody is talking about the Balkans. They're talking about Afghanistan. "It Can't Be Just About Us"--Frank Schnittger, ETian Extraordinaire
I see the US more as a destabilizing factor in most regions it's been involved in since the 1990s. Most economists teach a theoretical framework that has been shown to be fundamentally useless. -- James K. Galbraith
Bosnian Serb leader against appointing U.S. special envoy BELGRADE, April 8 (Xinhua) -- Bosnian Serb leader Milorad Dodikon Wednesday warned the United States to refrain from appointing a special envoy for the troubled Balkan country, Bosnia's news web portal Pincom reported. "Solutions should be sought within the boundaries of local institutions and that should be possible unless requests for general changes are irrational and unrealistic," Dodik told a news conference in the Bosnian city of Banja Luka. "I count on the U.S. administration being sensible, but if it decides (to appoint a special envoy), those who make such a decision will also be responsible for its success or failure," said Dodik, prime minister of the Bosnian Serb entity of Republika Srpska. He said that announcements about the appointment of a U.S. special envoy for the Balkans were the result of lobbying by those who wanted radical changes in Bosnia-Herzegovina. According to diplomatic sources, the idea of the new U.S. administration appointing a new envoy for the Balkans has been increasingly getting broader local and international support, and the U.S. State Department continues to contemplate this possibility. ...
BELGRADE, April 8 (Xinhua) -- Bosnian Serb leader Milorad Dodikon Wednesday warned the United States to refrain from appointing a special envoy for the troubled Balkan country, Bosnia's news web portal Pincom reported.
"Solutions should be sought within the boundaries of local institutions and that should be possible unless requests for general changes are irrational and unrealistic," Dodik told a news conference in the Bosnian city of Banja Luka.
"I count on the U.S. administration being sensible, but if it decides (to appoint a special envoy), those who make such a decision will also be responsible for its success or failure," said Dodik, prime minister of the Bosnian Serb entity of Republika Srpska.
He said that announcements about the appointment of a U.S. special envoy for the Balkans were the result of lobbying by those who wanted radical changes in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
According to diplomatic sources, the idea of the new U.S. administration appointing a new envoy for the Balkans has been increasingly getting broader local and international support, and the U.S. State Department continues to contemplate this possibility.
...
Everyone is in thrall to Obama and they want a piece of his magic in Bosnia, too. Most economists teach a theoretical framework that has been shown to be fundamentally useless. -- James K. Galbraith
