Balkan Psychosis and Bosnia’s Enduring Legacy

The traumatic images and gruesome stories of ‘ethnic cleansing’ which emanated from the conflict in Bosnia & Hercegovina dominated television screens in the early 1990s.

The conflict ended in November 1995 with the signing of the Dayton Agreement,but as Bosnia gradually seeped from Western minds, what did Dayton actually do to encourage political stability and reconciliation?

The narrative of Bosnia’s turbulent and violent history depends on which of its three main ethnic groups tells the narrative: Bosnian Serb, Bosnian Croat or Bosnian/Bosniak Muslim.

When accused of an atrocity, each ethnic group highlights an historical incident where ‘they’ were the victims of equally horrific acts by ‘their’ victims.

From extermination camps at Jasenovac in 1941, the destruction of Vukovar in 1991, through to the genocide at Srebrenica in 1995; each ethnic group has its own powerful sense of victimhood – what I call the ‘Balkan Psychosis’.

Dayton created The Office of the High Representative (OHR) “responsible for overseeing implementation of civilian aspects of the Peace Agreement ending the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina”. Freezing the frontlines and allowing combatants to settle arguments over slivers of disputed territory, it created a structure of government containing two entities: Republika Srpska and the Bosniak/Croat Federation, each with a President, Parliament, and Courts. A separate independent district of Brćko was also established.

Bosnia & Hercegovina was to remain a sovereign state with a rotating tripartite Presidency, a Parliament and Supreme Court. The Federation was split into 10 cantons, each with a Premier and Government – five with a Bosniak majority, three with a Croat majority and two mixed.

This highly complex system of governance, set against the backdrop of historical antagonism between the ethnic groups, was guaranteed to create profound challenges.

The President of Republika Srpska affirms that Bosnia is a “failed state” and denies its very existence.A referendum on independence for the entity has been threatened in the past. In the Federation, Bosnian Croats yearn for their own distinct entity. Internecine conflict has developed between politicians from the two main Bosnian Muslim political parties, attempting to oust each other from positions at Federation and cantonal levels. Following parliamentary elections for the State Government in October 2010, the main political parties took 16 months to agree the formation of a government.

The criteria of laws which the European Union has stipulated Bosnia must adopt in order to gain candidate status include serious democratic, economic, and human rights reforms; but they are stillborn.

The “Seydić/Finci” ruling by the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR) is a direct challenge to Dayton. The applicants are Bosnian citizens – a Roma and a Jew. The Constitution defines “constituent peoples” (Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks) “and others” (Jews, Roma and other national minorities who declare no affiliation). The House of Peoples of the Parliamentary Assembly (the second chamber) and Presidency are composed only of persons belonging to the three “constituent peoples”.

Mr Finci declared to the Central Election Commission his intention to stand for election to the aforementioned bodies. He was informed that he was ineligible to stand because he is Jewish. The ECHR found this violated several articles covering discrimination and the right to a free election. The political parties have taken no substantive action to rectify this.

The OHR has chosen to sit back, using none of its considerable powers to intervene in any of the disputes. Instead, they have emphasised the need for local politicians to sort out ‘local difficulties’ themselves.

Dayton has failed to secure the co-operation between the current political class which is vital to the future of its citizens of whichever ethnicity. It has cemented an ethno-centric political model into the foundations of the country, which the wartime political leaders of the 1990s crafted and nurtured.

Dayton, a peace settlement, required a mandatory status as an isolated solution. A ‘sunset clause’ would have forced the International Community to revisit Bosnia and seriously tackle its complex inter-ethnic problems. Instead, it exists as an obstacle to cohesion and integration. Dayton is not assisting the transition from a volatile past to a stable future, which must ultimately mean  European Union membership for Bosnia.

The transcripts from trials at the International Criminal Court for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY) will prove crucial for future generations to ascertain the facts about what actually occurred during the 1992-95 war. The country’s politicians accuse the Court of bias against ‘their side’, or claim ‘victory’ on acquittals. However, the early lack of urgency by the ICTY, the only legitimate source of facts on events between 1992-95, in bringing the most significant war crimes suspects to justice, has further prolonged any tangible sense of justice. The graves have frozen.

If you are mired in disputes concerning the past, how do you begin to grapple with the problems of the present and future?