**

*...  Bosnia’s **fundamental
problem*<http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2008/07/31/bosnias-problem/>
* is that its ethnic communities cannot agree on whether the country should
exist at all, let alone how. *

*Left to their own devices, it is possible the three communities could
perhaps find some way to either live together, or go their separate ways.
*

*The Empire, however, has other plans.  ...*

*...   After a decade of bloody, costly and dubious wars in the Middle East,
the restored Clinton gang **needs the
Balkans*<http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2008/12/18/there-they-go-again/>
* as a contrasting example of "successful" liberal interventionism. Between
all this, nobody is willing to accept that **Bosnia is a
fiasco*<http://nationalinterest.org/node/4190>
*, even though that is the **obvious
truth*<http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2010/03/28/whither-bosnia/>
*.*



http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2010/10/08/the-bosnian-standoff/

*The Bosnian Standoff*

Empire's Fantasy and Balkans Reality
by Nebojsa Malic <http://original.antiwar.com/author/malic/>, October 09,
2010

Antiwar Forum <http://antiwar-talk.com/>

Though some of the results of last week’s general elections in
Bosnia-Herzegovina have potential to prove interesting down the road,
overall the vote was neither unexpected nor dramatic. Twenty years after the
first multi-party election, which saw the triumph of ethnic parties and set
the scene for Bosnia’s subsequent civil war, nothing substantial has changed
in Bosnian politics. Serbs remain opposed to a centralized government.
Croats remain unhappy about their dwindling numbers and influence, but would
rather perish than agree with the Serbs on anything. Meanwhile, Muslim
leaders continue to insist on Izetbegovic the Elder’s dream of a centralized
Bosnian state, dominated by Muslims. This particular form of
deadlock<http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6940TK20101005> may
well be dubbed the "Bosnian standoff." The Empire and partisans of liberal
interventionism<http://blogs.praguepost.com/politics/2010/10/03/remember-bosnia/>
may
find it frustrating, but it is a fact nonetheless.

Serbs remain opposed to a centralized government. Croats remain unhappy
about their dwindling numbers and influence, but would rather perish than
agree with the Serbs on anything. Meanwhile, Muslim leaders continue to
insist on Izetbegovic the Elder’s dream of a centralized Bosnian state,
dominated by Muslims. This particular form of
deadlock<http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSTRE6940TK20101005> may
well be dubbed the "Bosnian standoff," and has been the default state of
affairs since the first multi-party elections in 1990.

*Retrenchment*

In the Serb Republic, current PM Milorad Dodik’s party retained its
majority, while Dodik himself will move to the post of President. It would
not be unreasonable to expect that office to become more important in the
coming days, as power in Bosnia tends to be vested in persons, rather than
the offices they occupy. Much more interesting was the race for the Serb
seat in the country’s three-man Presidency, which the incumbent, Nebojsa
Radmanovic, won by just 2.75%.

After many years of factional disputes, the principal Croat ethnic party,
HDZ, has reasserted itself. However, it still lost the race for the Croat
seat in the Presidency, which went to the incumbent, the Social-Democrat
Zeljko Komsic.

*The Son Also Rises*

The elections were most dramatic among the country’s Muslims. Haris
Silajdzic, Muslim member of the Presidency for the past four years and a
fixture in every government since 1992, came third in the presidential vote.
His party was also trounced in races for the state and Federation
parliaments. The principal beneficiary of Silajdzic’s demise was Fahrudin
Radoncic, overleveraged media tycoon who sought to save his fortunes by
founding a political party. Radoncic’s Better Future Party (SBB) won some
seats in various parliaments, and he himself came in second in the Muslim
leg of the Presidency race. For a party that didn’t exist a year ago, these
are spectacular results — but for the opportunists who crossed over from
Silajdzic’s camp, they won’t be good enough.

In the end, the Muslim Presidency seat went to Bakir Izetbegovic, son of
the wartime Muslim
leader<http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2003/10/23/the-real-izetbegovic/>,
Alija. The Western media have praised
him<http://www.time.com/time/world/article/0,8599,2023347,00.html> as
a "moderate"; but in comparison with Silajdzic, that isn’t exactly hard.
Compared to the current party leader, Sulejman Tihic, the younger
Izetbegovic is an outright extremist. He commands the loyalty of the party’s
"old guard" — Izetbegovic the Elder’s fellow Islamic revolutionaries — and
has already called
Turkey<http://www.todayszaman.com/tz-web/news-223564-100-izetbegovic-asksturkey-to-continueits-role-in-balkans.html>
a
"powerful and wise big brother," and asked for its continued
involvement<http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2010/04/30/stirring-the-bosnian-pot/>
in
Bosnia.

Other than Izetbegovic’s victory, however, the SDA had little to celebrate.
In all but one of the six Muslim-majority cantons in the Federation, they
lost to the Social-Democrats (SDP).

*A Bitter Victory*

On paper, the SDP has much cause for celebration. In addition to their
near-sweep in the cantons, they should have the most seats both in the
Federation and the state parliaments. Their man in the Presidency was
re-elected by an overwhelming margin. Yet the fruits of this victory may
turn into the seeds of SDP’s undoing.

To actually govern, the SDP will have to form a coalition with someone.
Trouble is, all of their choices are bad. Irrespective of electoral math, a
coalition with Radoncic is unthinkable for a legion of reasons; he
represents everything the SDP have campaigned against, from kleptocracy and
opportunism to corruption and crass chauvinism. The HDZ is already sore that
the SDP won the Croat seat in the Presidency with Muslim votes. But if they
ally with the SDA, which now appears likely, the SDP would have to
compromise their principles (social democracy, anti-nationalism) for the
sake of power. They’ve done it once before, in 2000, when they allied with
Silajdzic at Washington’s urging. That "Alliance for Change" was a fiasco
from which the SDP took 8 years to recover.

To make matters worse, the SDP have a horrible relationship with the social
democrats (Dodik’s SNSD) in the Serb Republic, whom they consider to be
nothing more than nationalists. The SNSD, for their part, think of the SDP
as yet another Muslim ethnic party, whose vision of Bosnia doesn’t differ
significantly from that of Izetbegovic — father or son. An alliance with the
SDA, however motivated by pragmatism, will only reinforce that perception.

*Empire’s Dream*

Bosnia’s fundamental
problem<http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2008/07/31/bosnias-problem/>
is
that its ethnic communities cannot agree on whether the country should exist
at all, let alone how. Left to their own devices, it is possible the three
communities could perhaps find some way to either live together, or go their
separate ways. The Empire, however, has other plans.

Washington has already expressed a
desire<http://www.rferl.org/content/US_Urges_Bosnias_Leaders_To_Find_Common_Ground/2176663.html>
for
a government "committed to tackling the outstanding constitutional and other
issues needed to place the country on a *firm path to Euro-Atlantic
integration*" (emphasis added). Translated from State Department-speak, this
means a regime willing and able to amend the country’s Constitution (thus
revising the 1995 peace treaty) in order to create a centralized government,
for the ostensible purpose of joining the EU and NATO.

Why does the Empire continue to insist on a Bosnia that cannot realistically
exist? There are several explanations, overlapping to an extent. To the U.S.
foreign policy establishment, Bosnia is more than just a small, landlocked
Balkans backwater. It is a founding
myth<http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/5494/> of
Empire, a nexus of symbols that underpin everything that came after, from
Kosovo to Afghanistan.

It is a symbol of Empire’s power to declare that the multiethnic Yugoslavia
must and shall fracture along ethnic lines, but a multiethnic Bosnia cannot.
For some, it is also a shining example of U.S. benevolence towards the
Muslim world, for which Washington expects
gratitude<http://grayfalcon.blogspot.com/2007/04/jihadists-take-note.html>.
After a decade of bloody, costly and dubious wars in the Middle East, the
restored Clinton gang needs the
Balkans<http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2008/12/18/there-they-go-again/>
as
a contrasting example of "successful" liberal interventionism. Between all
this, nobody is willing to accept that Bosnia is a
fiasco<http://nationalinterest.org/node/4190>,
even though that is the obvious
truth<http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2010/03/28/whither-bosnia/>
.
Read more by Nebojsa Malic

    - After Empire<http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2010/09/24/after-empire/>–
September 24th, 2010
   - Capitulation, Not
Compromise<http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2010/09/10/capitulation-not-compromise/>–
September 10th, 2010
   - Westerwelle’s Big
Adventure<http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2010/08/27/westerwelles-big-adventure/>–
August 27th, 2010
   - The Sorrow of
Empire<http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2010/08/06/the-sorrow-of-empire/>–
August 6th, 2010
   - Cry Havoc <http://original.antiwar.com/malic/2010/07/22/cry-havoc/> –
   July 22nd, 2010
_______________________________________________
News mailing list
News@antic.org
http://lists.antic.org/mailman/listinfo/news

Reply via email to