WASHINGTON -- Deeply wounded by his impeachment, Bill Clinton is facing one of his most difficult foreign policy challenges yet: trying to convince Yugoslavia that he means business while his threat to use force is being questioned on Capitol Hill, where the president's credibility is still at rock bottom.

Putting aside Clinton's failures to back up earlier threats with action, White House aides say they are increasingly concerned that outspoken opposition in Congress to NATO airstrikes is undercutting the president's tough talk. On Friday and again yesterday, Clinton asserted his resolve to use military force in Yugoslavia and said it would be in the U.S. national security interest to do so.

Yet many in Congress have publicly stated that no U.S. security interests are at stake in Kosovo. Administration officials claim that Capitol Hill doubts may be sending a message to Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic that U.S. resolve will crumble before military action can be taken.

"If there's any frustration, it's that this is not a new issue. We've been working on this since October," a senior White House national security aide said. "Congress has a prerogative to look at the issue, to debate the whole question of American interests and involvement in Kosovo. That's healthy."

"That said, we have to be careful about the way that's perceived, particularly by Milosevic," he added.

The president will meet with as many as 60 congressional leaders this morning at the White House -- only four days after a similar meeting with 31 lawmakers -- in an effort to convince them that military action against Serbia may be unavoidable. A Republican senator, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the meeting Friday was less amicable than participants portrayed it at the time.

At that meeting, National Security Adviser Samuel R. Berger grew visibly angry at congressional resistance to Clinton's policy, saying the administration had expended great effort to align NATO allies behind military action and should not be undercut now. The meeting "was substantially more prickly" than participants have let on, the senator said.

A procedural vote is scheduled in the Senate today on a proposal that would prohibit such military action without prior congressional approval. Although the proposal is given little chance of passing, the debate has already given senators the opportunity to publicly air their reservations about Clinton's threat of airstrikes against Serbia.

"Before we go bombing a sovereign nation, we ought to have a plan," argued Texas Republican Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison. "What if an American plane is shot down? What if an American is taken as a POW? What is our commitment then?

"The administration has not looked at the third, fourth and fifth steps," she argued.

Such statements seemed to take the administration by surprise. White House officials believed Friday that they had made headway against Congress' deep skepticism, but the lines hardened anew over the weekend. They hope to soften opposition again before the Senate resumes its debate after lawmakers meet with the president today.

Clinton's problems are myriad, said Idaho Sen. Larry E. Craig, a member of the GOP leadership. Impeachment and scandal have greatly diminished his personal credibility, but more importantly, his past military gambits have left Republicans fearful of obligations with no apparent end.

The president assured Congress that U.S. troops would be pulled out of Bosnia in a year. They have now been enforcing a fragile peace there for more than three years. U.S. troops also remain in Haiti, five years after they were first deployed.

The Kosovo accord already signed by the Kosovar Albanians calls for at least a three-year peace-keeping commitment.

"Beyond his own problems and his own personal foibles, the president has struggled mightily to build a foreign policy record," Craig said. "He has sent us off around the world in a variety of ways from Haiti to Bosnia, and in all instances, never coming to Congress with a full plan and a real justification."

White House aides say the criticism of Clinton's foreign policy is not always fair. It was a mistake for the president to say the Bosnian peacekeepers would be pulled out within a year, they acknowledged, but it was an honest mistake. Deployment took far longer than expected, and unforeseen political complications have kept them there.

Besides, they say, from Bosnia to Haiti, American forces have kept the peace and saved lives.

Still, Republicans and Democrats say Clinton has botched the sales job of his Kosovo policy. In the run-up to the gulf war, former President George Bush used speeches, press conferences and private meetings with Congress to vilify Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, giving U.S public opinion an enemy with a face.

In contrast, Milosevic remains a hazy figure, sometimes an enemy, sometimes a negotiating partner.

"When you risk blood and treasure, you need to have a consensus behind it," said presidential historian Robert Dallek. "It's very effective to personify, to demonize your opponent -- make Milosevic into Hitler."

Clinton has yet to address the nation on Kosovo in a prime time speech, although national security advisers hinted that he would do that either just before or after airstrikes begin. He spent the weekend lining up support with NATO allies but beyond Friday's meeting, he did not lobby Congress.

"He hasn't done very much to sell it," said Rep. Tillie Fowler, a Florida Republican and outspoken opponent of Clinton's military policies. "Having a press conference on a Friday afternoon when most Americans are working is not really communicating with the American people."

Neither of Maryland's senators, Democrats Paul S. Sarbanes and Barbara A. Mikulski, would comment on the issue yesterday. A spokesman for Sarbanes, the second-ranking Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee, said the senator thought it was "premature" for him to comment while U.S. envoy Richard Holbrooke was still on a diplomatic mission to Belgrade intended to "avert the use of force."

A Mikulski spokeswoman observed that the issue "is still evolving" and that Mikulski is planning to issue a statement after the Senate vote today.

Most leading Democrats stand behind the president and have been willing to take a stand.

"What is the downside of not acting? It's immense," said Joseph R. Biden Jr. of Delaware, the leading Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. "Our entire policy toward Europe since World War II has been to promote stability. How long can America remain aloof from an unstable Europe?"

Pub Date: 3/23/99