LEADING ARTICLE:Bosnia beyond the bombing

The moral argument for bombing Bosnian Serb military installations is unassailable. Until yesterday the Serbs had violated just about every humanitarian rule governing warfare and escaped unpunished. Monday's slaughter in Sarajevo was the latest insult to decency. Now they know that, whatever the policy differences between Europe, the United States and Russia, the UN can still represent effective, collective action.

Yesterday, however, before the raids began, we expressed caution about the timing of the assault, even though this newspaper has long called for international action against the Bosnian Serbs. When others argued for withdrawal, we urged that UN forces should be strengthened. Our caution reflected a tactical concern for the peace process which may, just, be moving into a more positive phase.

It will be some time before we can judge whether that process has been enhanced or harmed by the military events of the past 48 hours. It is entirely possible that the assault on Serb positions will make the prime aggressors of the war more accommodating at the conference table. It is also possible, however, that Serb resolve will harden and that in the ensuing hiatus the Muslims and Croatians will regard firm Western military action as a spur to their own military ambitions.

For the moment, at least, there are some encouraging signs. If initial intelligence reports are to be trusted, yesterday's attacks have destroyed much of the equipment that could protect Bosnian Serb military hardware against further assault. Serb minds may be focused by such helplessness. But if Western governments now have a more credible military strategy, less vulnerable to hostage taking, do they also have a coherent plan for establishing a political settlement?

At the moment the US-inspired peace plan is for a post-war Bosnia comprising a Muslim-Croat area, confederated with Croatia, and a Bosnian Serb area, linked to Serbia. There are many outstanding difficulties, notably whether Gorazde would be surrendered to the Bosnian Serbs to consolidate their block of territory.

It is a third-best solution, which leaves the international community accused of legitimising ethnic cleansing. The notion of a pluralistic, multi-ethnic Bosnia would be destroyed in all but name. There is also the possibility that a settlement reached on this basis would quickly degenerate, with Bosnian Croat lands being merged into Croatia, a Greater Serbian state being established and the Muslims cast into a tiny, non- viable block of territory.

But, it is probably the best deal available, given that the West, though now prepared to resist atrocities, is not in a position to re-establish the old pre-war Bosnia. So far both the Muslims and the Croats have signed up for the deal, although it is seldom possible in this conflict to take such statements at face value. Only the Bosnian Serbs are officially resisting.

The task for the American negotiators is to press the Serbs towards a deal, using the threat of further military action where necessary. The negotiators, however, cannot ignore the risk that if the Bosnian Serbs shuffle towards a deal, there will be a temptation for the Croats and the Muslims to re-focus upon military advantage, rather than a peace agreement. There is a long way to go in the process of restoring stability and civilisation in the Balkans, but there is no doubt that an opportunity of sorts has emerged. Seizing it will require further patience, skill, determination and self-sacrifice.