Ahead of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s elections on October 3, USIP’s Daniel Serwer discusses their significance and the challenges facing the country and region.
October 1, 2010
Ahead of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s elections on October 3, USIP’s Daniel Serwer discusses their significance and the challenges facing the country and region.
- With Bosnia and Herzegovina’s elections coming up on Oct. 3 what is the biggest concern of the citizens of the country
- Why is this election significant?
- Can you explain how ethno-nationality has been a challenge for government reforms?
- Can you expand on what constitutional reforms have been suggested?
- What could change with the elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina?
- Do you see any lessons the international community and other nations struggling to emerge from conflict can learn from Bosnia and Herzegovina’s experiences?
- Is there hope for Bosnia?
With Bosnia and Herzegovina’s elections coming up on Oct. 3 what is the biggest concern of the citizens of the country?
Bosnians’ main concern is unemployment. For Bosnians, jobs, corruption and crime rank far above political problems or interethnic tensions. But they have tended to vote as if ethnicity was the key to their future. It is not.
Why is this election significant? Why should the U.S. and the international community care about the election and its results?
Bosnia has been stalled for years, stuck in a nationalist tug of war between Bosniaks and Serbs, with the Croats contributing occasional tugs on the rope. If it is to get out of this rut, the push will need to come from the voters in these elections. The country needs new leadership. I hope it gets it.
If it remains stuck, I fear there is a real possibility of political miscalculation that would lead to violence. One of the Serb leaders has repeatedly promised his constituency a referendum asserting Republika Srpska’s autonomy from the international community and even its claim to independence. Any such referendum is likely to prompt others to assert the unity of the country, possibly by force.
In your Sept. congressional testimony on Bosnia and Herzegovina, you said you hope the “elections will bring to power a social democratic party that transcends ethnic divisions, but it will need ethno-nationalist parties to form a parliamentary majority.” Can you explain how ethno-nationality has been a challenge for government reforms?
The Bosniak nationalists have wanted to abolish Republika Srpska, or at least weaken it significantly. The Serb nationalists respond by insisting that Republika Srpska be as autonomous as possible, a condition they claim is provided for in the Dayton constitution. The result is stalemate. Bosnia is falling farther and farther behind its neighbors in the effort to join the European Union.
In your testimony, you also said “Given its current constitution, there is no escape for Bosnia from ethnic nationalism.” Can you expand on what constitutional reforms have been suggested?
Many have been suggested, but in my view it would be best to start with two: elimination of provisions that require specific ethnicities for public office and a new “EU clause” that gives the Sarajevo government the authority to meet the requirements of EU accession, without the possibility of veto by either Republika Srpska or the Federation.
What could change with the elections in Bosnia and Herzegovina? What are the regional implications of the elections?
There will be no dramatic change in the political parties vying for power in these elections, but if the more obstructionist politicians are emarginated it may be possible to form a government with a serious commitment to reform. That is what is needed.
I hope that as Croatia reaches the end of the EU accession process it will turn its skills and experience to helping Bosnia prepare itself for the EU. It is vital that both Zagreb and Belgrade tell their co-nationals within Bosnia that they need to focus on integrating into the Bosnian polity and on gaining the benefits of EU membership as soon as possible.
If violence were to break out in Bosnia, or if Republika Srpska were to declare independence, the consequences would be catastrophic, in particular for Serbia. Belgrade would then have to decide whether to intervene in Bosnia or to recognize Republika Srpska—either move would end Serbian hopes for early entry into the EU.
Do you see any lessons the international community and other nations struggling to emerge from conflict can learn from Bosnia and Herzegovina’s experiences?
Yes. We need to be careful about constitutional provisions that tend to make the hold of the warring parties on power permanent. We also need to recognize that ethnoterritorial solutions have rarely proven as trouble-free as their proponents claim. And we need to be careful to support local initiatives for reform—externally imposed reforms may be necessary soon after a conflict, but 15 years later it is really hard to tell elected politicians what to do.
Is there hope for Bosnia?
Yes. There is nothing in Bosnia that can’t be fixed with initiative on the part of Bosnians and coordinated support from Washington and Brussels. These past four years have not been productive ones for reform in Bosnia, where both Republika Srpska and the Federation are in fiscal trouble and the national government is stalled. I very much hope the next four years will bring a sharp contrast: economic revival, a big push for EU membership and a concerted effort at constitutional reform.