In Bosnia-Herzegovina where tri-presidential and parliamentary elections were held last Sunday it seems that nothing has changed. It is true that the representatives of nationalistic parties of old times lost the elections. Yet, it is too early to rejoice, for the new-comers do not look less nationalistic than their predecessors. Although the international community boasts about its accomplishments in Bosnia, the future of the country seems uncertain and divided more than ever. Is Bosnia condemned to be a “constitutional Frankenstein”?
A dramatic change… or not?
Since the end of the war, Party of Democratic Action (SDA), Serbian Democratic Party (SDS) and Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ) have marked the political life of Bosnia-Herzegovina for years.
| |
|
 |
|
| Central Election Commission of BiH |
|
However, at these tri-presidential elections, candidates of SDA, Sulejman Tihic, of SDS Mladen Bosic (SDS) and of HDZ Ivo Miro Jovic lost the race to their respective adversaries without remedy. Bosnia’s new presidency will consist of Haris Silajdzic from Party for Bosnia-Herzegovina (SzBiH), Nebojsa Radmanovic from Alliance of Independent Social Democrats (SNSD) and Zeljko Komsic from Social Democratic Party (SDP).
SzBiH and SNSD are known as moderate parties when compared to their predecessors. The former is a liberal party, the latter a social democratic party. Therefore, we may allow ourselves to affirm that the Bosnian people, as Ulysses of modern times, did not succumb to the nationalistic sirens of the past. And we do have every reason to rejoice at the fact that at last Bosnia got rid of the evil spirits of nationalism. Or don’t we?
The electoral campaigns were simply ferocious. Every argument, every accusation, every statement, whether they were Bosniak-, Serb- or Croat-originated, were based on ethnic clashes. Although Bosnia is one of the poorest countries of the Balkans, ethnic-based rhetoric prevailed over the most important economic and social problems.
Right after the first results of the elections were announced, Nebojsa Radmanovic retorted that if Haris Silajdzic, the strongest advocate of a united Bosnia, continues to pursue such a scheme, “the cooperation will be very hard” since a united Bosnia “cannot happen”.
As for the new Croat member of the presidency, HDZ and some of the Croat electorate protested that Zeljko Komsic was in fact elected by the social -democracy-oriented Muslim Bosniaks. Komsic was not nominated by Croat parties, but by SDP, a multi-ethnic party. Therefore, it would not be a surprise if the Croats boycott the Croat member of the new presidency in days to come.
And these three men are supposed to work together and implement the requested constitutional amendments and many other reforms. There is a big probability that we witness (once again) the radicalisation of the Bosnian political scene in years to come.
In the light of all the statements coming from the representatives of these not-quite-nationalistic-as-their-predecessors parties, before and after these fifth elections in Bosnia, one should put the question: in what exactly do these differ from the good old nationalistic parties anyway? As their predecessors, they address to the “ethnicities” that they represent and not to the “citizens” of Bosnia-Herzegovina as a body.
Bosnia: the “constitutional Frankenstein”
All along the electoral campaign, the chairman of SNSD and current Prime Minister of Republika Srpska, Milorad Dodik did not hesitate to hint at the probability of an independence referendum for the Serbian entity for many times.
When warned by the High Representative of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Christian Schwarz-Schilling, Dodik boldly stated: “Let him dismiss me. I assume everything I have said about the referendum. We shall not give up our position and if dialogue is cut with the EU then I ask this question: who needs the European Union?”
Defiance is often a good quality for a politician, if used with moderation and in the right context. And of course, there are many who criticise the raison d’être of the Office of the High Representative (OHC) that sometimes treats Bosnia as an international protectorate or a colony. Former High Representative Lord Ashdown was particularly interventionist, having dismissed some 70 democratically elected Serb MPs for different reasons.
However, to envisage a “cut of dialogue” with the EU, one of the main investors of Bosnia-Herzegovina, seems a bit suicidal. The fact that a moderate politician such as Milorad Dodik could make such a statement is already more than significant. Even Serbia proper has not uttered such a bold threatening statement yet, although the case of Kosovo represents an open wound for this country.
Since the secession is legally and politically impossible, Republika Srpska, with its people and its government, in short as a whole, is in favour of the maintenance of a divided Bosnia-Herzegovina as it is today, a “constitutional Frankenstein”.
As to the Bosniaks, they are in favour for a united Bosnia. Haris Silajdzic’s insistence for a “Bosna bez entita” (Bosnia without entity) may even mean a unification by force. With Bosnian Serbs who regard Belgrade as their capital instead of Sarajevo, the clash between Haris Silajdzic and Milorad Dodik (through Nebojsa Radmanovic) would take indeed a very serious shape in the future.
| |
|
| |
 |
| |
Milorad Dodik |
And for the Croats, their attitude depends on what exactly the international community and the Bosniaks mean by a united Bosnia. Instead of being a mere national minority in a united Bosnia, they would probably rather join their own motherland, Croatia. Or worse still, if Bosnia continues to be a “constitutional Frankenstein”, the Croats would demand their own entity, a “Republika Hrvatska”.
In this situation, the international community has every reason to worry, not to boast about its great achievements in Bosnia. If schools in ethnically mixed regions are segregated and the students use different parts of one building and avoid meeting, this simply leads us to conclude: it is still too early to shut down the OHC and it is definitely too early to wind down the international peacekeeping mission in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
The Dayton system stipulated a weak state as being the condition of peace. However, such a weak state fails to gain the confidence of the Bosnian people. Every election proves the general lack of confidence in the efficiency of the current political system in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
Only constitutional amendments and fundamental reforms could lead to the simplification and normalisation of the Bosnian political system. However, the Bosnian chessboard is a chessboard for three. And unfortunately, the point of views of these three players could not have been more radically different.
Related items:
Elections in Bosnia-Herzegovina: Full Details (25.09.06)
Serbia or Swan that Refuses to Sing its Final Song in Kosovo (17.09.06)
Croatia: The Ramparts of Europe Again (27.08.06)
"Bosnian Question" or Re-Balkanisation of the Balkans (14.08.06)
Balkans under the Threat of a Fragmentation Bomb Called Kosovo (03.08.06)
The Boiling Cauldron Bosnia-Herzegovina (16.07.06)
Republika Srpska: Should I Stay or Should I Go? (19.06.06)
Main Page | News Page | 007 News | Print
|
