The administration said this week that any decision on military action in Bosnia would come after the results of the Bosnian Serb referendum and that the U.S. delay was largely due to hesitation on the part of European governments.
The Europeans, who on Monday rejected Clinton's plan to arm Bosnia's Muslim-dominated government, have been reluctant to act in the face of what they perceive as U.S. indecisiveness.
Keohane says it is "appalling" to see Europe "vacillating," and the "last thing the U.S. wants is to be stuck in a quagmire with Europe saying 'we told you so.'"
Hoffmann says the crisis in former Yugoslavia is an international issue which deserves the attention of every country.
"It's not primarily a European problem," Hoffmann says. "It's a Russian problem...and it's a problem for the U.S. as well because of the ethnic cleansing."
"It's a global hot potato," Hoffmann adds.
Others say the European nations became accustomed, during the Cold War, to following the lead of the U.S., especially in the military arena.
"Intervention in Bosnia is not in any country's immediate hard-headed concrete interest," Wallander says. "There is an enlightened long-term self-interest...that is the stability of Europe."
"But it takes hegemons to make a case and absorb the cost," Wallander says," and to do that the U.S. is left."
Part of the U.S. reluctance stems from a fear that intervention will turn a civil war rooted in deep religious, cultural and political differences into a situation analagous to Vietnam.
And as more officials and the media continue to make this analogy, the specter of Vietnam is beginning to loom larger in the minds of the American public.
But Assistant Professor of Government Celeste M. Wallander says people should be wary of comparing the crisis in former Yugoslavia to the Vietnam War.
"The Vietnam analogy is useful in some sense--in that it cautions the U.S. involvement militarily...and heightens awareness," Wallander says. "But there's been a shading of that analogy--politically it is different.