BALKANS AFTER DAYTON: OLD THEMES AND NEW CHALLENGES

Analysis No. 291, November 2015 BALKANS AFTER DAYTON: OLD THEMES AND NEW CHALLENGES Stefano Pilotto Twenty years after the signature of the Dayton Agreements on Bosnia-Herzegovina, the memories of the terrible events concerning the collapse of Yugoslavia are present in the daily life of people and the public opinions, as well as the governments, are partly scared by the future. The Dayton Agreements represented a diplomatic and military chance to interrupt part of the strives, but the permanent efficacy of such a solution is still under question, in a region in which all the neighbor countries are dealing with an intricate number of issues. Only few days ago, a delegation of the University of Trieste (Italy) participated to an international seminar in Banja Luka (Bosnia-Herzegovina) on Dayton Agreements and the Youth, with the presence of several students coming from the whole Bosnia-Herzegovina and belonging to both the political entities and to all the three ethnic groups. The doubts about the quality of the Dayton Agreements of 1995 seemed evident in many aspects. Stefano Pilotto, Ph.D. History of International Relations, MIB School of Management in Trieste. 1 The opinions expressed herein are strictly personal and do not necessarily reflect the position of ISPI. The ISPI online papers are also published with the support of Fondazione Cariplo

The Dayton Agreements represented a diplomatic and military chance to interrupt part of the strives The political decision to force the interruption of the fights in 1995, by establishing two entities (a Serbian Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina better known as Srpska Republic, occupying 49% of the territory, and a Croatian-Muslim Federation of Bosnia-Herzegovina, occupying 51% of the territory), divided by a virtual internal line, protected by an international peacekeeping military mission provided by NATO (the Intermediation Force, with approximately 40.000 soldiers), seemed to be, at that moment, a positive decision, at least to stop the incredible massacres provoked by the armed bodies in the area, between 1991 and 1995. The historical competition among different cultures and religions in Bosnia-Herzegovina, as a matter of fact, emerged again in a grievous way in the period of the collapse of Yugoslavia, and the international community was unprepared to manage a new international test, as a consequence of the welcomed fall of the Berlin wall. The growing evidence of the need to intervene to protect huge violations of human rights was progressively present in the western administrations, even though the level of timeliness associated to the reaction was undoubtedly inadequate. The bare capacity to obtain a common political useful proposal at the European level, after a number of failed attempts, moreover, boosted the United States of America to take the initiative to force the resistances and to impose an agreement which was a result of a pragmatic approach led by humanitarian aims. The countless atrocities in the area, such as among the others the ones of Srebrenica, Knin and Vukovar, hitting all the involved populations, were prevented by the Dayton Agreements, but such a deal represented, on the other hand, a source of legitimacy to maintain the permanent presence of the international troops in the area. During the following years the international presence of NATO countries was increased on the territory of Bosnia-Herzegovina and, afterwards, the responsibility of the international peace-keeping and peace-enforcing mission was transferred to the European Union. The international Community, moreover, decided to create a new function to support the political stabilization of Bosnia-Herzegovina: the so called High Representative, whose tasks would have been to oversee the implementation of the civilian aspects of the Dayton Agreements. The measures introduced by the deal negotiated in Ohio and signed, few weeks later, in Paris on the 14 th of December 1995, had a positive impact on the regional fights, in a sense that no more violent struggles intervened after 1995 among the local populations. The bare capacity to obtain a common political useful proposal at the European level, after a number of failed attempts, moreover, boosted the United States of America to take the initiative to force the resistances and to impose an agreement which was a result of a pragmatic approach led by humanitarian aims The international Community, moreover, decided to create a new function to support the political stabilization of Bosnia-Herzegovina: the so called High Representative, whose tasks would have been to oversee the implementation of the civilian aspects of the Dayton Agreements 2

The permanent efficacy of such a solution is still under question Which sort of sovereign state is Bosnia-Herzegovina as issued by the Dayton Agreements? The Constitution of Bosnia-Herzegovina is considered by the citizens as an imposed constitution by the foreign countries and that aspect is affecting the democratic start of the political implementation process. The political architecture of the country, furthermore, is still considered as the most complicated of the world, since the two political entities (the Srpska Republic and the Croatian-Muslim Federation) and the three ethnic and religious groups (the Serbs-Christian Orthodox-, the Croats-Christian Catholic- and the Bosniak-Muslim-) are represented through a sophisticated and theoretical balance of power. To ensure the fundamental respect of all the populations of Bosnia-Herzegovina the structure of the power is obviously weak and uncertain, with the result to give a considerable hidden power to the High Representative of the international community, who often becomes the real referee of the administration of Bosnia-Herzegovina. The role, the attitude and the real importance of the High Representative during the last years, as a matter of fact, were permanently under questions and in the middle of quarrels. Is it possible to consider Sarajevo as the capital of a full independent state? The doubt is appropriate and the citizens of Bosnia-Herzegovina are conscious of the fact that their country has still to follow a further road map, in order to achieve its full independence. Such a situation provokes a sense of frustration, of course, and it does not accelerate the integration process of the country into the European Union. Every ethnic group, moreover, is oriented to protect more the fundamental aspects of its specific culture and religion than the common interests of a multinational state, whose citizenship is not felt as it should be. One of the main issues of Bosnia-Herzegovina, as a matter of fact, is the state-building consciousness and the social integration of the population. The Dayton Agreements provided peace, after 1995, but, during the last twenty years, they did not provide neither the sense of full independence, nor the political emancipation of the country. Leaving the citizens of Bosnia-Herzegovina alone to ensure by themselves the right of self determination of peoples, however, may not correspond to a solution, as it seems clear that new conflicts may quickly arise among the different ethnic groups. The dilemma on how to help Bosnia-Herzegovina to take off towards full self determination and political assertiveness is present both in Sarajevo and abroad. The recent circumstances concerning the neighbor countries, likewise, directly or indirectly affect the delicate balance of Bosnia-Herzegovina, by introducing an additional agonizing dilemma: should the Srpska Republic become independent or become part of Serbia? The option is constantly exploited by political leaders to obtain The citizens of Bosnia-Herzegovina are conscious of the fact that their country has still to follow a further road map, in order to achieve its full independence. Such a situation provokes a sense of frustration, of course, and it does not accelerate the integration process of the country into the European Union 3

higher responsibilities, in order to better protect the cultural interests of their ethnic group. Bosnia-Herzegovina is a political puzzle, the biggest question mark of the whole Balkan region for the future. Last year, during the events organized to remind the one hundred years anniversary of the Sarajevo attempt against the Prince Francis Ferdinand of Austria, which provoked the beginning of the First World War, the ethnic groups of Bosnia Herzegovina were not united in celebrating the same values: for some of them Mr. Gavrilo Princip was a terrorist who killed the potential emperor of the Austrian-Hungarian Empire, for the others Mr. Gavrilo Princip was a national hero, who had the courage to attack the country which was threatening the independence and the security of the Serbian Kingdom. This deep difference of perception was present this year too, when, in July 2015, the authorities of Bosnia-Herzegovina, decided to commemorate the twentieth anniversary of the massacre of Srebrenica, where seven thousands of people (almost all Bosniak muslims) were killed by the Serbian Bosnian troops: when the Prime Minister of the Republic of Serbia, Mr. Aleksandar Vucić, went, this year, to Srebrenica to join the commemoration, showing the necessary sense of responsibility to establish a shared memory of the recent past, some people of Srebrenica challenged him and threw some stones to him. In the same way, when, in Summer 2015, the British diplomacy made a proposal to adopt a resolution at the United Nations level to identify the massacre of Srebrenica as a genocide, some people of Bosnia-Herzegovina (mainly the Bosniak muslims) considered that such a proposal was appropriate, but some other people (mainly the Serbs of Bosnia-Herzegovina), considered that such an initiative was wrong and not suitable, in a moment in which many efforts were made to reduce the differences between the ethnic groups, in order to prepare a lasting sense of peace. The terrorist attack of Paris, moreover, enhanced the need of security also in Bosnia-Herzegovina, the country in Europe in which lives the highest rate of Muslim people: the very recent attack made by Enes Omeragic, who killed in Sarajevo two soldiers of the Bosnia-Herzegovina armed forces before committing suicide in his home, was actively discussed by the public opinion and increased the already existing tension inside of a fragile country. Which sort of relations link the Muslims of Bosnia-Herzegovina with the most radical Islamic groups, as the Islamic State of Irak and Syria? Which new destabilizing perspectives the huge flow of immigrants from Syria has introduced in Bosnia-Herzegovina? Any dangerous base for new potential terrorists? These doubts are present in both non Muslims groups of Bosnia, the Serbian one and the Croat one, but also among the moderate Muslims and among the intellectuals. The country, with a GDP per Capita which, in 2013, was the lowest of the Balkan region (4598 US Dollars in Bosnia-Herzegovina, in front of 4610 US Dollars in Albania, 4944 US Dollars in the Former Yugoslavian The terrorist attack of Paris, moreover, enhanced the need of security also in Bosnia-Herzegovina, the country in Europe in which lives the highest rate of Muslim people: the very recent attack made by Enes Omeragic, who killed in Sarajevo two soldiers of the Bosnia-Herzegovina armed forces before committing suicide in his home, was actively discussed by the public opinion and increased the already existing tension inside of a fragile country 4

Republic of Macedonia, 5907 US Dollars in Serbia, 7026 US Dollars in Montenegro, 7328 US Dollars in Bulgaria, 8910 US Dollars in Romania, 13405 US Dollars in Hungary, 13562 US Dollars in Croatia and 22756 US Dollars in Slovenia 1 ) is facing the double challenge of supporting the GDP growth (in 2013 the GDP growth was 2.5%, in 2014 it was 1.1% and, according with the forecasts, in 2015 should be 2.1% 2 ) and of attracting new foreign direct investments without damaging the government deficit (it was -3.4% in 2014 3 ) and the public debt (it was 44.8% in 2014 4 ). The obstacles that Bosnia-Herzegovina has to overcome today seem to be partly enlarged by the non achieved implementation of the Dayton Agreements of 1995. The transition of Bosnia-Herzegovina towards democracy and open market economy is not finished yet and, according with Professor Miloš Solaja (Director of the Centre for International Relations of Banja Luka) as well as with Professor Mirko Pejanović (Professor at the Faculty of Political Sciences of the University of Sarajevo), the integration of Bosnia-Herzegovina into the European Union will be possible at least in several years, certainly not in the framework of the European Union 2020 Enlargement Strategy. Corruption, organized crime and lack of democracy seem to be main enemies of a quick integration of Bosnia-Herzegovina into the European Union organization. Should the Dayton Agreements be reformed and adapted to the today s situation? A region in which all the neighbor countries are dealing with an intricate number of issues The main efforts of the political administrations of the neighbor countries of Bosnia Herzegovina are now oriented to manage the urgent issue of security and the one of refugees immigration. The long term plan for all of The transition of Bosnia-Herzegovina towards democracy and open market economy is not finished yet and, the integration of Bosnia-Herzegovina into the European Union will be possible at least in several years, certainly not in the framework of the European Union 2020 Enlargement Strategy. Corruption, organized crime and lack of democracy seem to be main enemies of a quick integration of Bosnia-Herzegovina into the European Union organization 1 Cfr. Document on Bosnia-Herzegovina, IMF, 9 October 2015, p. 14, www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/scr/2015/cr15299.pdf. 2 Regional Economic Issues: Central, Eastern and Southeastern Europe, IMF, November 2015, p. 48, www.imf.org/external/pubs/ft/reo/2015/eur/eng/pdf/rei1115.pdf. 3 Ibid., p. 50. 4 Ibid. 5

them is the integration into the European Union organization, but the today s new emergencies are going to postpone such an achievement. Slovenia, Hungary, Bulgaria, Romania and Croatia, all members of European Union, are dealing with the dilemma concerning the attitude to be adopted in front of a massive flow of refugees coming in Europe from the Middle East and Afghanistan. Slovenia and Hungary, as members of the Schengen Area, feels the responsibility to respect the rules of immigration, in front of the other 24 Schengen Area Member States, but they are both politically embarrassed by the recent policy adopted by Germany, whose target is to open the doors to all the refugees having the asylum right. The Hungarian government was the first one who took the hard decision to establish new barbed wire fence at the borders, in order to prevent the non controlled entrance of hundred thousand of refugees from Middle East and Afghanistan. Slovenia, in the very recent days, has decided to follow the Hungarian behavior, to reduce the entrance of refugees on the territory. Croatia, on the other hand, is playing the role of a faithful supporter of the general European Union approach, by keeping the border open and establishing, as a consequence, a new tension with the Slovenian authorities. The other countries of the Balkan region (Greece, Albania, the Former Yugoslavian Republic of Macedonia, Serbia and Bosnia-Herzegovina) have adopted quite an open approach to the problem of refugees, knowing that the big majority of those refugees would have just considered those territories as an area of transfer, since the clear final geographical target for most of the refugees would correspond to the rich part of Europe (Germany, Italy, France, ). Croatia, nevertheless, is now waiting to have a new government, after the parliamentary elections of the 8 th of November 2015: the light victory of the center-right party of Mr. Tomislav Karamarko (HDZ with 51 seats out of 151 seats), in front of the center-left party of the today s Prime Minister Mr. Zoran Milanović (SDP with 42 seats out of 151 seats) indicate that the new government might be led by a coalition having the HDZ party in the middle, but the weaker parties are potentially changing any possible internal balance and Mr. Milanović may lead a new government with the crucial support of other left-wing and moderate parties. A very important step made by the center-left government of Mr. Milanović, during the last days, has been the one of a new rearmament, having Washington and Berlin as permanent reference suppliers. Such a decision has two main aims: to reassure the moderate and conservative parts of the population about the faithful position of Croatia within the framework of NATO and European Union, and to guarantee the Croatian population about the will of the government to be military equipped, in order to face new potential challenges launched by the international terrorism. The new Croatian decision to undertake a rearmament process, nevertheless, has provoked a reaction in Serbia. The Prime Minister of Slovenia and Hungary, as members of the Schengen Area, feels the responsibility to respect the rules of immigration, in front of the other 24 Schengen Area Member States, but they are both politically embarrassed by the recent policy adopted by Germany, whose target is to open the doors to all the refugees having the asylum right 6

Serbia, Mr. Aleksandar Vucić, has shown interest in establishing an even stronger cooperation with Russia, in order to receive more armaments from Moscow, to counter the Croatian rearmament policy and to strengthen to role of Serbia in the heart of the Balkan region. Still facing a deep economic crisis, Serbia is, however, a dynamic country in the region, having two main priorities: to continue to make political and economic reforms to accelerate the conclusion of its transition period to enter EU, and to find adequate solutions to maintain the Serbian sovereignty of the autonomous province of Kosovo. The economic and political reforms, in general, are going towards the direction suggested by the European Union and the government led by the Serbian Progressive Party (SPS) of Mr. Vucić is managing the possible economic recovery with the necessary incentives to attract new foreign direct investments. Some free zones were established during the last years in Serbia. The choice made seven years ago by the Italian Fiat Group remains the best example of success. By creating a joint venture with the Serbian State (33% belonging to the Serbian State and 67% belonging to Fiat), the Italian group invested 1,3 billions Euro to built the most advanced car production plant in Europe, in the Serbian town of Kragujevac. Such an investment created 1800 new jobs in Kragujevac and allowed Fiat (today the name of the company is FCA) to produce 600 cars per day (the very well known 500 L car). That was the most important industrial investment done by Fiat, which is giving work today to 3000 workers (1200 were already employed in the old Zastava plant) and the volume of sales of Fiat Serbia is corresponding to 5% of the Serbian GDP and to 10% of the Serbian export. Behind Fiat, several other European companies decided to discover Serbia as an attracting destination of economic investments. Still facing a deep economic crisis, Serbia is, however, a dynamic country in the region, having two main priorities: to continue to make political and economic reforms to accelerate the conclusion of its transition period to enter EU, and to find adequate solutions to maintain the Serbian sovereignty of the autonomous province of Kosovo The weak aspect of the political cooperation between Serbia and the western countries is focused on two main problems: the consequences of the NATO bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999 and the not neutral behavior of the European Union in the framework of the following Kosovo status. The bombing of Yugoslavia in 1999 (at that time Yugoslavia was represented by Serbia and Montenegro) created an irreversible lack of confidence between the Serbian people and the United States of America. Serbia does not want to apply to become member of NATO and that position is not going to change in the next years. The historical ally of Serbia is Russia and money or other materialistic incentives offered by the western countries to Serbia would not modify the historical brotherhood existing between Moscow and Belgrade. The specific foreign policy adopted by the United States of America in the framework of the Serbian autonomous province of Kosovo and Metohija, since 1999, influenced the foreign policy of the main western European countries and, therefore, of the European Union, with reference to the same subject. Serbia considers the Self Proclaimed Republic of Kosovo (the declaration by the Kosovar-Albanian 7

representatives was done in 2008 with the fundamental support of Washington) as an abuse of the international law. The attitude of the European Union, during the last 16 years, has been oriented towards an increasing pressure to be done on Belgrade to encourage the recognition by Serbia of the independence of Kosovo. The European Union, on the other hand, would have supported the integration of Serbia into the European Union. Such an attitude by Brussels did not build confidence between Serbia and the European Union, despite the progresses done in the framework of the integration process during the last months. The issue of Kosovo and Metohija is still there, the apparent improvements cannot dissimulate the heavy tensions existing among the Serbian citizens living in Kosovska Mitrovica or in the Serbian enclaves of Kosovo and Metohija, like Gorazdevac or Velika Hoča. The same feelings are present in the Serbian Christian Ortodox Church today. The recent request of the representatives of the Self Proclaimed Republic of Kosovo to be admitted in the UNESCO organization has been perceived as a provocation and as an insult by the Serbian Christian Ortodox Church: the Serbian Monasteries of Kosovo and Metohija (Pec, Dečani, Gracanica, Prizren) are part of the patrimony of the human mankind set up by UNESCO and they are protected day and night by the international Kfor troops, to prevent the attacks of the Kosovar-Albanians against the Christian churches (on the 17 th of March 2004, several Serbian churches and buildings in Kosovo and Metohija were attacked and partly destroyed by the Kosovar Albanians). In a very recent Communiqué, written by the Bishop of Raška-Prizren and Kosovo-Metohija, Teodosije, the high representative of the Serbian Ortodox Church underlines that the eventual accession of Kosovo to this organization [UNESCO], particularly in the current situation with our holy sites which are, by the way, the only UNESCO sites in Kosovo and Metohija, would be an imposition of an act of occupation 5. Few days ago, on Monday the 16 th of November 2015, the UNESCO countries did not accept the Self Proclaimed Republic of Kosovo as member of the organization. The local tension remains and it affects also the political stability of the Former Yugoslavian Republic of Macedonia, which was shocked by a very serious internal crisis in July 2015, due to the internal corruption of the leading party and to the battle in the ethnically mixed city of Kumanovo, between police and ethnic Albanian gunmen (many of them were arrived from Kosovo). Skopje is dealing with the need to guarantee a political stabilization at the internal level, to manage balanced international relations with the neighbor countries, to find a solution for the issue concerning the official name of The European Union, on the other hand, would have supported the integration of Serbia into the European Union. Such an attitude by Brussels did not build confidence between Serbia and the European Union, despite the progresses done in the framework of the integration process during the last months 5 Communiqué of the Bishop of Raška-Prizren and Kosovo-Metohija Teodosije, the 16 th of October 2015, http://www.b92.net/eng/insight/pressroom.php?yyyy= 2015&mm=10&nav_id=95823. 8

the country and to control the borders in front of the huge flow of refugees coming from Greece. During the last hours the authorities of the Former Yugoslavian Republic of Macedonia decided to build a barbed wire fence at the border dividing the country with Greece, in order to reduce the immigration trend. This decision is going to increase the political competition with Greece, because it is emphasizing the problem of the number of refugees on the Greek territory, with growing popular reactions in a country which has been in the middle of the European concern for financial reasons during the last four years. Conclusions The twentieth anniversary of the signature of the Dayton Agreements offers an opportunity to analyze the situation of the Balkan region. Most of the western Balkans countries are facing serious problems connected with the mutual relations, the historical issues, the demographic trends, the ethnic migrations and, now, the international terrorism. The European Union crisis of values since 2005, the world economic and financial crisis since 2008, the Arab Springs since 2010, the European Union monetary crisis since 2011, the humanitarian refugees crisis since 2015 have compromised the previous timetable to ensure a quick and stable integration process into the European Union. The unpredictable and sometimes irrational political decisions taken by the western powers have locally jeopardized the development of a mutual confidence among the different Balkan countries. The mutual confidence, based on reliable elements of cooperation, remains a crucial pillar to provide peace and prosperity in a region which represents a unique area of mixed cultures and heritages, an amazing mosaic of civilizations and artistic masterpieces, an impressive shelter of habits and traditions. The books written by Ivo Andrić, Miroslav Krleža, Miloš Crnjanski, Predrag Matvejević offer a precious support to understand the mind of the Balkan populations, their sense of life and their ancient sense of pain. The today s crisis is a chance to better learn how tough is the challenge inside of this incredible European area. The twentieth anniversary of the signature of the Dayton Agreements offers an opportunity to analyze the situation of the Balkan region. Most of the western Balkans countries are facing serious problems connected with the mutual relations, the historical issues, the demographic trends, the ethnic migrations and, now, the international terrorism 9