Publication: The issue of identity in reconstruction process of post-war Bosnia and Herzegovina
Abstract
Bu çalışmada 1992-1995 yılları arasında Bosna-Hersek’te yaşanan savaş sonrasında kurulan devletin problemleri ve etnik kimliğin aldığı yeni boyut, çok etnili toplumlarda çatışma yönetimi teorileri ve Bosna-Hersek’in tarihindeki önemli noktalar göz önünde bulundurarak analiz edilmeye çalışılmıştır. Bosna-Hersek’te yaşayan üç etnik grup - Boşnaklar, Sırplar ve Hırvatlar- arasında 1980’lerin sonunda belirginleşen milliyetçiliklerin 92-95 savaşıyla patlak vermesi ve savaşın büyük kayıplara yol açmasından sonra Dayton Barış Antlaşması Boşnak-Hırvat Federasyonu ve Sırp Cumhuriyeti’nden oluşan bir Bosna-Hersek devleti kurdu. Ancak koalisyonel demokrasiye dayalı olarak kurulan bu devlet mevcut etnik bölünmeleri daha da kuvvetlendirmiş ve liberal demokrasilerin bir gereği olarak görülen sivik kimliğe dayalı bütün bir Bosna-Hersek devleti kurma idealini gerçekleştirememiştir. Bosna-Hersek’te yaşayan üç etnik grup da bütün bir Bosna-Hersek devletine siyasi anlamda bağlılık duymamaktadır. Bosna’nın bugünkü sorunlarının nedenlerini anlayabilmek için akademik çevrelerde etnik çatışmalara genel anlamda nasıl yaklaşıldığını ve Bosna-Hersek’in tarihsel gerçekliklerinin bu yaklaşımlarla ne derece sınırlanabileceğini incelemek gerekmektedir. Bundan sonra savaş sonrası devletin etnisiteye dayalı yapılanması, bunun yarattığı sonuçlar ve Bosna-Hersek toplumundaki eğilimler dikkate alınarak bütün bir değerlendirme yapmak mümkün olmaktadır. Bu değerlendirme sonucunda Bosna-Hersek için belirsiz bir geleceğin var olduğu ve anayasa değişiklikleri gibi teknik düzenlemelerle toplumu bütünleştirmenin kolay olmadığı ortaya çıkmaktadır.
In this study, the problems of the state that was constructed after the war experienced in Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1992-1995 and the new dimension that ethnic identity gained were tried to be analyzed by considering theories of ethnic conflict management and important points of Bosnia’s history. After the nationalisms that were becoming salient in late 1980s among the three ethnic groups of Bosnia-Herzegovina - Bosniacs, Serbs and Croats- broke out with 92-95 war and the war caused great losses, the Dayton Peace Agreement constructed a state of Bosnia-Herzegovina comprised of Bosniac-Croat Federation and Serb Republic. However, this state that was arranged as a consociational democracy has further reinforced current ethnic divisions and failed on its ideal of construction of a unified Bosnia-Herzegovina based on a civic identity -as seen as a requirement for liberal democracies-. The three ethnic groups of Bosnia do not have an allegiance, politically, for a unified Bosnian state. To understand the reasons of current problems, there is need to analyze that how it is approached to ethnic conflicts in academic quarters and to what extent the historical realities of Bosnia can be restricted by these approaches. Then it is possible to make a whole evaluation by considering the ethnically-based structuring of post-war state, its consequents and tendencies in Bosnian society. As a result of this evaluation it is understood that there is an uncertain future for Bosnia-Herzegovina and it is not easy to integrate the segments of Bosnian society with some technical arrangements such as constitutional changes.
In this study, the problems of the state that was constructed after the war experienced in Bosnia-Herzegovina in 1992-1995 and the new dimension that ethnic identity gained were tried to be analyzed by considering theories of ethnic conflict management and important points of Bosnia’s history. After the nationalisms that were becoming salient in late 1980s among the three ethnic groups of Bosnia-Herzegovina - Bosniacs, Serbs and Croats- broke out with 92-95 war and the war caused great losses, the Dayton Peace Agreement constructed a state of Bosnia-Herzegovina comprised of Bosniac-Croat Federation and Serb Republic. However, this state that was arranged as a consociational democracy has further reinforced current ethnic divisions and failed on its ideal of construction of a unified Bosnia-Herzegovina based on a civic identity -as seen as a requirement for liberal democracies-. The three ethnic groups of Bosnia do not have an allegiance, politically, for a unified Bosnian state. To understand the reasons of current problems, there is need to analyze that how it is approached to ethnic conflicts in academic quarters and to what extent the historical realities of Bosnia can be restricted by these approaches. Then it is possible to make a whole evaluation by considering the ethnically-based structuring of post-war state, its consequents and tendencies in Bosnian society. As a result of this evaluation it is understood that there is an uncertain future for Bosnia-Herzegovina and it is not easy to integrate the segments of Bosnian society with some technical arrangements such as constitutional changes.