A U.S. decision to stop enforcing the UN arms embargo against the Moslem-led Bosnian government drew sharp condemnation Friday from the Russian parliament and criticism from Washington's NATO allies.


White House officials confirmed Friday that U.S. naval vessels on the Adriatic Sea would stop diverting ships carrying weapons to Bosnia and Croatia, in keeping with a U.S. Congress mandate to cut funds by Tuesday for U.S. activities backing the arms embargo.


The State Duma, which has traditionally sided with the Serbs in the Bosnian conflict, overwhelmingly approved a resolution protesting against the U.S. move.


"The actions of the American side, dictated by domestic policy concerns, lead to chaos and high-handedness in international relations and the exacerbation of the Balkan crisis," said the statement, passed by a vote of 271 to 3 against, with one abstention.


"The move demonstrates the United States' disrespect of the world community's stand."


The resolution, which is non-binding, also asked Yeltsin to consider raising the issue as a matter of urgency at the UN Security Council.


Vladimir Lukin, head of the Duma's Foreign Affairs Committee, hinted that Russia might retaliate by supplying the Bosnian Serbs with weapons.


"We have weapons too, don't we?" Lukin told reporters. "And there are ways to supply them. We will ensure our interests to the extent that it is necessary."


Critics of the embargo, which was imposed by the United Nations 31 months ago on all sides in the Bosnian conflict, say it is tilted against the Bosnian government, which has suffered huge territorial losses against the much better-armed Bosnian Serbs.


But Britain and France, key allies of the United States, also voiced concern over Clinton's apparent breach of the UN resolution.


The two countries, which provide most of the peacekeeping forces in Bosnia, are worried that the United States' de facto withdrawal from the embargo would lead to an escalation of the war and to losses among the allied troops.


The United States has no troops on the ground in Bosnia.


A top U.S. official told Reuters that the United States would still help the embargo by watching the borders between Serb areas of Bosnia and the Serb-dominated rump Yugoslavia.


But that would only prevent weapons from falling into the hands of the Serbs, and the same official added that the Moslems were getting some arms even when U.S. military ships enforced the embargo on the Adriatic.


Lukin told the legislature that he considered the U.S. move a betrayal of its allies.


"It's like an allied army fighting a battle and then one detachment guarding, say, the left flank, saying that it will not fight but will instead let enemy troops pass," he said.He added that he believed Clinton's decision had been caused by the results of the U.S. elections, which brought a Republican majority to the Congress.


"It is a populist post-election move," Lukin said. "Helping the Bosnian Moslems is popular in the States."


Lukin speculated that the U.S. move was also a response to Russia's recent independent diplomatic efforts in Iraq, where Foreign Minister Andrei Kozyrev on Thursday apparently persuaded President Saddam Hussein to recognize Kuwait as an independent nation.


"The United States is letting us know that they can also take unilateral actions," said Lukin, a former Russian ambassador to Washington.


The Bosnian government welcomed the U.S. move Friday. The Associated Press quoted Bosnian Prime Minister Haris Silajdzic as saying that the decision marked a "turning point."


Vice President Ejup Ganic praised the United States for taking a democratic approach to the issue. "The U.S. government, by its democratic nature, does not belong to the company of nations that believe in imposing an embargo on the victim," he said.