The Ethno-Territorial Separation of Bosnia Was the Key to Ending the War and Keeping Peace

The Dayton system has kept the peace for twenty-five years. Why destabilize Sarajevo now?

As befits a successful peace agreement, the November 1995 Dayton accords that ended the Bosnian war were marked on their twenty-fifth anniversary with a flurry of international conferences. Oddly enough, even though a general acknowledgment that the accords have kept the peace, most recommendations call for radically “revising Dayton,” on the grounds that Bosnia’s institutions are too cumbersome, prone to corruption and politically unfair to minorities. Even more oddly, many proposals have been made to address these problems by dismantling the very structures that have brought and maintained peace. Instead, NATO forces are supposed to impose upon the Croats and Serbs of Bosnia, half the population and majorities in 60 percent of its territory, the centralized state that they went to war to prevent. Since there are no indications that many Croats and Serbs will accept this, NATO troops would likely be regarded by them as an occupying force, a role that has not worked well in Afghanistan or Iraq.

The constitution of Bosnia & Herzegovina (B&H) that was included as annex 4 of the Dayton agreement is certainly complex. It divided the country into sub-territories, almost all of them dominated by only one of the country’s three main ethno-national communities: Bosniaks (known until 1993 as Muslims), Croats and Serbs. These ethno-polities are linked in a confederal structure, with the central government holding very little authority, and even that conditioned on rarely achieved consensus from the representatives of the three communities. Almost all governmental power resides at the levels of the ethno-territorial “entities”, one Serb, the other Bosniak and Croat, and within this last, among ten cantons, five Bosniak, three Croat, and two mixed.

Yet constitutionalizing the ethno-territorial separation of these three communities was the key not only to ending the war but to keeping the peace. The year 2020 was also the thirtieth anniversary of the free and fair elections at the end of communism, when the population of B&H partitioned itself into three mutually exclusive constituencies, Bosniak, Croat and Serb. A single party of each won almost all votes from that community, while those promising a social democracy of equal citizens did very poorly. Since Bosniaks comprised 43 percent of the population, Serbs 34 percent and Croats 17 percent, forming a joint state would only be possible if the members of these communities agreed to it. Tragically, but not surprisingly, they did not: while Bosniaks wanted a strong central government, Croats and Serbs fought the war in order to avoid having such a centralized state imposed upon them. They accepted inclusion in B&H at Dayton only because the central government has very little authority over them.

Critics argue that this system of ethno-territorial power-sharing is undemocratic because it blocks citizens from forming non-ethnic majorities and makes it impossible for minority members to run for some offices. They also argue that corrupt ethno-national elites exploit the weakness of the central state in order to enrich themselves. And finally, they assert that the ease of blocking consensus prevents the central government from taking supposedly necessary decisions, notably joining NATO.

Bosnia’s many problems, however, are not due to the Dayton constitution, or to its lack of accession to NATO. On Transparency International’s 2019 Corruption Perceptions Index, BiH scored better than NATO members Albania and North Macedonia, only slightly worse than Serbia and NATO founding member Turkey, and far better than Iraq and Afghanistan, where the long-term U.S. occupations have led to less viable states than B&H. None of these other countries has the Dayton system, though perhaps Iraq would have done better if then-Senator Joe Biden’s 2006 proposal to use Dayton as a model for its restructuring had been implemented.

And those putative anti-nationalist citizens who are disenfranchised by Dayton’s ethno-confederalism are very rarely found outside of debates in policy circles. In the 2013 census, nearly 97 percent of the population declared themselves Bosniak, Croat, or Serb. Only 1 percent declared themselves to be ethno-nationally neutral “Bosnians.” The three mutually exclusive ethnonational constituencies thus accurately reflect the social divisions of the society.

The war that was ended at Dayton was fought by three ethnoreligious armies and for three different countries: the overwhelmingly Muslim Army of B&H for all of Bosnia, including those places with few Muslims; the Army of Republika Srpska for a Serbian Fatherland composed of only parts of B&H, and the Croatian Defense Council for a Croatian Homeland that included only other parts of B&H. The territorial divisions at Dayton mainly followed the front lines between these forces, whose dead are now commemorated separately, and rarely in the same town, as Muslim “martyrs” (šehidi, from Arabic), or Croat “defenders,” or Serb “fighters.”

The Dayton constitution essentially proclaimed this house divided to be a condominium, despite two of three tenants rejecting co-ownership. The condominium can be continued only if those two tenants, the Croats and Serbs of B&H, are satisfied that the third one will not try to take over their parts of the house. Most of the proposals being made by denizens of U.S. think tanks to “fix Bosnia” are to have NATO help the Bosniaks in such a takeover, by imposing a centralized government on the Croats and Serbs. It is difficult to imagine a better way to destabilize Bosnia. It is even more difficult to find a defensible reason for such proposals.

Bosnia isn’t the way it is because of Dayton; rather, Dayton is the way it is because of the nature of Bosnian society. The Dayton system has kept the peace for twenty-five years. Why destabilize Bosnia now?

Robert M. Hayden is a professor of anthropology, Law and Public & International Affairs, at the University of Pittsburgh. He has done research on Yugoslavia for forty years; among his many publications is Blueprints for a House Divided: The Constitutional Logic of the Yugoslav Wars.

Zar smo dotle došli da vadite članke iz NI magazina koji je duboko diskreditiran, jer je objavljivao članke ruske špijunke i agenta utjecaja Marije Butine, pa ona na kraju završila uhićena od strane FBi i sad leži godinu i pol u max prison detention centru????
To je magazin čiji vlasnik je izvjesni Dimitri Konstantinovich Simes, Rus za kojeg je američka vlada utvrdila da je veza Putina i krajnjih rubova Republikanske stranke koje podržavaju Trump-a. Nije čak ni republikanski mainstream.
Ovaj članak je direktno napisan u vanjsko-političkom direktoratu FSB u Moskvi i nema nikakve veze ni sa politikom koju je Trump slijedio, a kamoli demokrati i Biden.
Za razliku od ovog "članka" naši ljudi svjedoče pred kongresom, sjede u timovima Biden-ove administracije za Balkan i nadirektnije su uvezani sa operativnom politikom koja će se ovdje sprovoditi naredne 4 godine. Ne vodi se politika samo po Briselskim i Berlinskim hodnicima, pa da Plenki briljira.
Nije zapadni Balkan odmah na redu, imat ćete oko godinu još predaha, prije početka "pregovora" o novom ustavu u kojem neće biti VNI, DN sveden na pravu mjeru i eliminacije drugih blokada. Tim od 30 vrhunskih pravnika ga piše po uzoru na njemački Grundgesetz. Kakav god da bude bit će svjetlosnim godinama ispred šupačkog annexa IV.

Bosnia isn’t the way it is because of Dayton; rather, Dayton is the way it is because of the nature of Bosnian society.

Za razliku od ovog "članka" naši ljudi svjedoče pred kongresom, sjede u timovima Biden-ove administracije za Balkan i nadirektnije su uvezani sa operativnom politikom koja će se ovdje sprovoditi naredne 4 godine. Ne vodi se politika samo po Briselskim i Berlinskim hodnicima, pa da Plenki briljira.
Nije zapadni Balkan odmah na redu, imat ćete oko godinu još predaha, prije početka "pregovora" o novom ustavu u kojem neće biti VNI, DN sveden na pravu mjeru i eliminacije drugih blokada. Tim od 30 vrhunskih pravnika ga piše po uzoru na njemački Grundgesetz. Kakav god da bude bit će svjetlosnim godinama ispred šupačkog annexa IV.

Postoji hrpa think-tankova i različitih mišljenja, pa ne treba slaviti ko i Muslimani kada neki njima naklonjen (ili kupljen donacijom, rečeno mi je da je $20-$30k popularan iznos za kupiti žeton na određeno vrijeme) thinktank napište nešto obratno.

Ja samo mogu reći, da ako doista privolite/natjerate Amerikance da za vaš račun demontiraju vlastiti mirovni sporazum, da se izlože nepredvidivom riziku sa ko-zna kakvim posljedicama i ishodima, sve to uz nejasnu dobit za njih, i uz rizik da istovremeno nagaze ozbiljne države u ovoj regiji u kojima imaju svoje važne interese (Hrvatsku i Srbiju), te vjerojatno i europske saveznike, e, ja samo mogu reći alal vam vera.

Na onaj dio koji se svodi na "ko god kaže nešto što mi se ne sviđa je ruski špijun" se neću ni obazirati.

Što se tiče ostalog, znaš da ja nikoga ne uvjeravam, niti prijetim niti rezolutno odbacujem mogućnosti. Sve su opcije u igri.

Ja samo mogu reći, da ako doista privolite/natjerate Amerikance da za vaš račun demontiraju vlastiti mirovni sporazum, da se izlože nepredvidivom riziku sa ko-zna kakvim posljedicama i ishodima, sve to uz nejasnu dobit za njih, i uz rizik da istovremeno nagaze ozbiljne države u ovoj regiji u kojima imaju svoje važne interese (Hrvatsku i Srbiju), te vjerojatno i europske saveznike, e, ja samo mogu reći alal vam vera.

To bi bilo ravno utjecaju Izraela na američku vanjsku politiku i miljama iznad onoga što su postigle npr. armenske i irske zajednice u SAD. Dakle, istovremeno najveći moderni uspjeh bilo koje zajednice u SAD, a ujedno i najkatastrofalniji (istovremeni) geopolitički poraz Hrvatske i Srbije u njihovoj povijesti.

Šta reći, nego se diviti osobama koje to isposluju. Ja bih ipak rekao da je izglednije da vam ti neki vaši dijasporci poprilično uveličavaju njihovu važnost i utjecaj. I sam sam upoznao sijaset takvih među Hrvatima u dijaspori - znaju sve i svakoga, imaju utjecajne prijatelje i kontakte na visokim pozicijama...ali nikad ništa konkretno. Ali opet, moguće je da imate najjače lobiste ikada među dijasporskim zajednicama, koji imaju snažna i iskrena prijateljstva među najvažnijim Amerima koji su voljni to njihovo pitanje i viziju staviti visoko na listu prioriteta i gurati dok ne izguraju, usprkos svim preprekama.

Što se tiče bh. Hrvata, ukoliko pođe po zlu, onda se adaptirati igri u tim novim okolnostima, ili pak sjesti sa bh. Srbima i vidjeti što je naša zajednička "Samsonova opcija".

Nema nama što tko obećavati, mi smo u Bih svoji na svome i vi se morate naučiti pameti da se pita svaki narod. Ako želite odlučivati sami odvojite se i radite što vas je volja.

Nismo jednake veličine i na razini kolektiva se ne pitamo isto. Jednaki smo samo individualno kao ljudi. Jeste vi svoji na svome, ali sa udjelom od 10 do 12% u ukupnom odlučivanju. To je demokracija, i ona sve tretira jednako. Hotiješ reći da je Trump trebao ostati predsjednik??? Pa njega podržava 45% Amerikanaca. Po tvome i previše. Puno sreće u sukobu sa Amerikom.

Zbog srpske želje za unitarizmom se raspala Jugoslavija i došlo do rata, zbog vaše želje za unitarizmom je bilo krvi do koljena u BiH.

I vi sada niste zadovoljni sa sporazumom koji je zaustavio rat, te vam dao 33% vlasti u zemlji, nije vam dosta, nego želite još, želite potlačiti druga dva konstitutivna naroda i uzeti svu vlast, sav teritorij, 100%, ponovno želite taj isti unitarizam koji je doveo do rata.

I očekujete da vam SAD, odnosno Biden, asistiraju u tom vašem velikobošnjačkom, megalomanskom poduhvatu, zanimljiva ideja i način razmišljanja, onako, pomalo sulud, pa ono, sretno sa time

Nisi ono ni počeo debatu, a već slaga pola toga. Nama po demokratskom principu pripada većina vlasti na državnoj razini, i to nije sporno. Ne uzmimamo tuđe, već svoje. O teritoriju se u ustavnim promjenama ne priča. U odnosu na susjedne zemlje, nema kod nas ni U od unitarizma. Mi samo hoćemo pošteno da se vlast dijeli, pa koliko ti pripada. Sretno i vama sa pokušajima zaustavljanja demokratizacije zemlje. Odluke nije moguće donositi podjelom vlasti na 3 jednaka dijela. Pokušali smo, i ne ide. U vašem interesu je bilo da dokažete suprotno, ali vi ste dokazali da smo mi u pravu.

u jednonacionalnoj državi vrijedi pravilo demokratske većine....u tronacionalnoj državi ne vrijedi.........možete krenuti stopama miloševića ali vidjeli ste i sami kako je to završilo..potocima krvi i zlom.....dali stavrno vi bošnjaci želite ponovo stradanje nevinih ljudi????...
i btw zašto bi itko sukobljavao se s amerikom....pa amerika ni dejtonski sporaztum nije radila bez konzultacija s europom....i uz suglasnost hrvatske , srbije i sva tri naroda u BIH....