More than any other European nation, Bosnia has struggled to
shake its association with war in the eyes of the western world. Tell someone you’re off on a trip there and
more often than not they’ll ask, with a look of surprise, “is it safe?” Until last week, apart from the landmines
scattered across Bosnia’s beautiful countryside, the only signs of the war that
tore the country apart in the 1990s were bullet and shell marks peppering buildings in many towns and cities. To the casual traveller, passing
through, Bosnia is a country of culture, history, good food and stunning
scenery and Sarajevo easily holds its own against any of the European capitals
as a vibrant, cosmopolitan city. But
scratch a little deeper and you’ll find the divisions and disillusions that
have flared into violent protests over the last few days.
It started in the north-eastern town of Tuzla last
Wednesday. Unemployed workers took to
the streets to protest about their poor pensions and unpaid benefits in a town that
was once an industrial hub. By the
weekend the protests had spread to Sarajevo, Zenica and Mostar, where government
buildings were set on fire and protesters clashed with the police. Bosnians are taking to the streets to object
to the corruption, nepotism and petty squabbling of their politicians, who they
hold responsible for Bosnia’s economic stagnation.
Official statistics put unemployment in Bosnia at 27.5%, but
it is believed that up to 44% of Bosnians are out of work. Youth unemployment is estimated at around
60%. The Bosnian economy has never fully
recovered from the war. Privatisations
of state firms have been rife with crooked deals. Added to the fact that most of these companies had already racked up massive debts during the collapse of the Yugoslav economy in the
1980s is the sad truth that Bosnia no longer has any industry to speak of and no service economy to fall back on.
The war in Bosnia ended nineteen years ago, in December
1995, with the signing of the Dayton Peace Accords. They left the country divided between the
semi-autonomous Republika Srpska (RS) and the Bosnian-Croat Federation. The government of Bosnia-Herzegovina is
headed by a three member presidency - a Bosniak and a Croat from the Federation
and a Serb from the RS – with the Chair rotating every eight months. Though the idea of electing politicians based
on ethnicity is troubling, in reality Bosnia’s politicians are distant, bloated
elites barely distinguishable from one another, regardless of their nominative
party. Below the national government are
layers of local government, divided into cantons, which in turn are subdivided
into municipalities. This multi-layered and
unwieldy system leads to frequent political deadlock, such as that seen last summer over the failure to pass a law on issuing ID numbers. The stalemate, which resulted in the death of
a young baby unable to leave the country for vital medical treatment, sparked protests in Sarajevo, which died down after only a few days. But the embers have been glowing ever since,
and last week were ignited once more.
The aim of the Dayton Peace Accords was to end the fighting
in a way that would be acceptable to all sides.
In many ways it is an impressive piece of diplomacy, creating a
structure within which Bosnia could begin its recovery from the conflict free from inter-ethnic
power struggles. But, nearly twenty years on,
Dayton has its critics. Eric Gordy
believes that Dayton created a “permanent,parasitic political class.” Like naughty schoolchildren, Dayton left Bosnia under international
guardianship, in the shape of the Office of the High Representative, an
international envoy who is unaccountable to the Bosnian people. Others have argued that Dayton left Bosnia’s
political situation unstable and divided along ethnic lines.
Prior to Dayton, the most serious attempt at a peace deal
was the Vance-Owen Peace Plan (VOPP), put forward in 1993, which proposed
division of Bosnia into ten semi-autonomous cantons. The VOPP was rejected by the three warring
parties, who could not agree on the divisions.
By August 1995, when an intense bombing campaign by NATO finally forced
the BSA to surrender, the situation on the ground had changed sufficiently to
allow the parties to sign a peace deal without losing face. The UN “safe areas” in Eastern Bosnia had
fallen to the BSA, eliminating the troublesome Bosniak pockets and
allowing virtual ethnic homogeneity in the east of the country, and the
Bosniaks and Bosnian Croats had formed an uneasy alliance against the Bosnian
Serbs. Under these circumstances, peace
was achieved and Bosnia, which had dominated news bulletins for three years,
slipped from the public consciousness.
 |
| “Look at us now, my God! Look at Vucko and cry.” |
The world had forgotten about Bosnia. It took three days for western news outlets
to pick up on last week’s protests, and they have now disappeared once more from the
headlines. It would seem that as long as
the Bosnians aren’t killing each other, the world doesn’t want to know. In a somewhat jarring juxtaposition with the
protests, British gold medal-winning ice dancers Jayne Torvill and Christopher
Dean returned to Sarajevo today to celebrate the thirtieth anniversary of their
success in the 1984 Winter Olympics. It
seems it is easier to remember the Bolero
than to remember the plight of the Bosnian people.
There have been calls for both further engagement by the international community and Bosnian self-determination in equal measure. Peace deals imposed by foreign diplomats which
leave nations crippled, humiliated and disgruntled can be dangerous. Yet Dayton cannot take all the blame and it
is important to note that the protests are targeted against internal
politicians, not the international community.
Discontent has been brewing in Bosnia for some time, held back only by fear of descent into the violence of the 1990s. Bosnians need to take ownership of the
problems in their country. The protests,
which have resulted in the resignation of the leaders of a number of cantons,
are a start. Far better than accepting
the terms imposed by outsiders is initiating internal reforms; by the people,
for the people.
Whilst some believe that the protests have united Bosnians from all ethnic backgrounds,
the protests have yet to have much of an impact in the RS. Some Bosnian Serbs are fearful that the
movement will undermine the autonomy of the RS, which is not as dysfunctional
as the Federation. Although it seems
impossible to talk of Bosnia without mentioning ethnic divides, there is a
danger that the ethno-nationalists will try to hijack the growing national discourse
for their own ends and steer it off course. If real change is to be effected in Bosnia, this cannot be allowed to happen.
 |
| "Courts and police are protecting the gangs in power" |
The protests need direction if they are to achieve anything. The frustration is understandable, but
mindless vandalism is not the answer. There
are signs that the protests are starting to organise, with a series of plenums
organised across the country. The ruling
political class cannot be expected to tear down a system from which they reap
such great financial rewards. What the
protesters need is someone to direct the anger and despair; leaders who are not
part of the status quo, who can translate their frustrations into the reforms
that are needed to stimulate the economy. The early elections that have been called for will be pointless until someone emerges to take on this
mantle. When they do, Bosnia’s Spring
may finally bloom.
