Concern has again been growing about the situation in Bosnia-Herzegovina.
With deepening political deadlock, and renewed talk of secession,
many observers now fear that the country may be on the verge of collapse.
There's even increasing talk about a return to conflict.
So, what lies behind the latest crisis? And just how dangerous is it?
Hello and welcome. If you're new to the channel my name is James Ker-Lindsay and here I take an
informed look at international relations, conflicts and the origins of countries.
There's a tendency to think that conflicts come to an end with a peace agreement.
However, this is rarely the case.
Indeed, it's said that half will fail within five years.
But even those that do survive are usually followed by extensive further renegotiations
over implementation or to make the situation more functional.
Ideally, this will eventually lead to a sustainable peace
where the threat of violence disappears.
However, in many cases deep political differences remain
and there's a lingering sense that conflict could return.
In a few cases, a situation may seem to improve only to take a downward turn - even years later.
One of the best examples is Bosnia and Herzegovina.
The scene of the most bitter conflict in Europe since the Second World War,
in the years after the conflict there was a sense that the country was starting to come together.
However, a quarter of a century later it now looks to be heading back towards violence.
I've covered Bosnia in several other videos. However, to recap,
the country lies in South East Europe.
To its north and west lies Croatia, Montenegro to its south,
and Serbia runs along its eastern border.
At 51,000 square kilometers, or a little under 20,000 square miles,
it's the 125th largest of the 193 members of the UN.
Its population currently stands around three and a quarter million.
According to the most recent census data
available, this is made up of three predominant ethno-religious groups.
The Bosniaks, formerly known as Bosnian Muslims make up around 50 percent of the population.
The Bosnian Serbs are at 31 percent and the Bosnian Croats at 15 percent.
The remaining three to four percent is made up of Montenegrins, Roma, Albanians and others.
While Bosnia has a long history,
our story really starts with the collapse of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, in 1991.
Against the will of Serbia, the largest of the republics,
Croatia and Slovenia declared independence sparking conflict.
Then, in March 1992, Bosnia followed suit.
In response, the country's Serbian community broke
away in the hope of uniting with neighbouring Serbia.
As the Bosnian Croats also attempted to secede and unite with Croatia,
the country descended into a bitter and bloody three-way war.
Although a peace agreement was reached between the Bosnian Muslims and the Bosnian Croats in
1994 that saw the creation of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Bosnian Serbs - who'd
established their own entity Republika Srpska - continued their efforts to secede.
However, this all changed in the summer of 1995.
After Bosnian Serb forces overran the town of Srebrenica and murdered 8,000 men and boys in
the largest act of genocide of the Yugoslav wars, the international community was forced to act.
In November 1995, the leaders of Bosnia, Croatia,
and Serbia met for peace talks in Dayton, Ohio in the United States.
Three weeks later, they reached an agreement.
Republika Srpska would be integrated into Bosnia-Herzegovina
as an entity alongside the Federation, but would have far-reaching autonomy.
The central government would have a complex power-sharing structure, including a joint
presidency made up of representatives of the country's three main peoples.
All this would be overseen by an internationally appointed figure, the High Representative,
who was given extensive powers to police the settlement, including the right to sack
officials and adopt binding decisions when the parties were unable to act.
In the first decade after the Dayton peace deal, the signs for Bosnia looked positive.
Despite the bitter war, significant steps were made towards rebuilding the country
and even forming new joint institutions.
Most importantly, the Bosnian Serb army was integrated into the Bosnian national army.
But then things began to falter. Integration effectively stopped.
At the same time, the situation was also complicated by a ruling from the European Court of
Human Rights that key elements of the settlement were discriminatory and had to be changed.
However, despite efforts by the European Union and the United States to broker a deal,
constitutional reform proved impossible as all three groups pushed their own agendas.
Meanwhile, the situation became increasingly tense as the Bosnian Serb leader,
Milorad Dodik, began to openly talk about secession and independence.
With Bosniak groups vowing to prevent Republika Srpska from breaking away,
observers began to warn of a return to conflict.
It's against this backdrop of long-standing tensions that the latest crisis has emerged.
While there's obviously a catalogue of problems that have led Bosnia to the current
crisis, the immediate cause of the present situation came in July 2021.
Following growing efforts by Bosnian Serbs to deny the genocide in Srebrenica,
the departing high representative, Valentin Inzko, used his powers to
enact legislation making genocide denial punishable by up to five years in jail.
Incensed at what was seen as a highly partisan decision,
the Bosnian Serbs first announced that they would boycott joint state institutions.
However, in October 2021, Dodik announced tougher measures.
Arguing that the High Representative had overreached his powers,
he announced that over 130 laws imposed by high representatives
would be annulled and powers and institutions repatriated to Republika Srpska.
This included tax, intelligence and judicial bodies.
Most controversially,
and most dangerously, he also laid out plans to recreate a Bosnian Serb army.
All this goes far beyond the previous crises seen in the country.
It poses a very real and immediate risk of state collapse.
As a result, it's now widely recognised that the situation on the ground
is more unstable than at any point since the end of the war.
In his first report to the UN Security Council, the new High Representative, Christian Schmidt,
a former German minister, stated that the country now faces an "existential threat".
So, what is Dodik planning to do?
In truth, it's hard to say.
A formal act of succession, although always possible, seems unlikely.
As I've explained in a previous video, this is prohibited under the terms of the 1995
peace agreement and affirmed by the UN Security Council and the International Court of Justice.
More to the point, it would face enormous practical problems.
Republika Srpska would be completely isolated.
Land borders would almost certainly be closed. As would airspace.
The only link would be to Serbia.
However, Belgrade would also come under enormous pressure
to act - with the risk of sanctions if it didn't.
A unilateral declaration of independence would almost certainly fail badly.
Instead, it seems that Dodik is now working to destabilise Bosnia from within.
One view is that maybe he thinks that if he makes the state dysfunctional enough
the Bosniaks will accept formal separation.
Perhaps. But this seems unlikely.
Not only would this see the country lose half its territory,
but it would also encourage the Bosnian Croats to break away.
This would leave a rump Bosnia squeezed between a Greater Serbia and a Greater Croatia.
Another idea, and this seems more plausible,
is that Dodik is using his threats as leverage on the international community.
By stepping up the pressure, the EU and the United States will press for
new talks on constitutional change and he'll get at least some of what he wants.
Then, later on, he can repeat the move, gaining back more powers.
Step by step, slowly, he could then be hoping to make RS independent in all but
name - perhaps opening the way for full secession at a future stage,
when the situation is perhaps better aligned for the Bosnian Serbs.
Whatever Dodik's motives, the current situation has led
many observers to argue that the country is now on the brink of collapse and violence.
So, just how dangerous is the current situation?
In truth, it's hard to say.
In his first report to the UN Security Council, which hasn't been made public,
but has been seen by various news organisations,
Schmidt stated that the country faced a very real prospect of a return to conflict.
However, others are trying to talk down the threats of violence.
Visiting the region, the US Deputy Assistant Secretary and new Special
Envoy for the Western Balkans, Gabriel Escobar, insisted that there won't be a return to war.
As he said, Dodik was just stirring things up to protect his own power.
So, could there be violence?
On a positive note, there are good reasons to argue that this won't escalate.
Leaving aside the fact that Dodik's behaviour is coming under attack from
within the Bosnian Serb community - even from hardliners who see it as
ultimately counterproductive - if conflict breaks out Dodik risks losing everything.
He'll almost certainly be held responsible.
More to the point, if RS is defeated, as would seem almost certain,
any new settlement would almost certainly be considerably worse for the Bosnian Serbs.
Crucially, as Escobar also pointed out, there's little sense that neighbouring Serbia,
the key actor in the previous conflict, wants to see a return to violence.
Having spent several decades trying to rebuild its relations with the West, and having started
EU accession, there's little reason for Serbia to throw it all away by destabilising Bosnia.
Indeed, many believe that Belgrade is also increasingly worried by Dodik's antics.
That said, many wonder whether Serbia can really rein him in.
Indeed, Russia appears to be a far more significant actor in this story.
But this too gives some grounds for hope.
Certainly, Moscow might well relish the chance to destabilise Bosnia;
especially as it feels increasingly marginalised by Western actors,
who appointed the latest high representative against its objections
and have rejected Russia's call for the post of the High Representative to be abolished.
However, it's unlikely that Moscow would want to see a return to full-scale conflict.
Given that it's over a thousand kilometres away and needs to cross NATO airspace to get to Bosnia,
it would hardly be in a position to help the Bosnian Serbs in the event of war.
And a Bosnian Serb defeat could fatally undermine Moscow's standing and credibility,
not just in Bosnia but also in Serbia.
Far better to keep the situation simmering than to let it boil over.
This all appears to give grounds for hope that a solution will be found
and that peace will prevail.
Indeed, there's also the argument that any moves made by the Bosnian
Serbs could be rescinded and that, as a last resort, Dodik could even be removed.
However, such situations aren't always driven by rationality.
And they certainly can't always be neatly managed.
Political crises in post-conflict societies can take on a life of their own,
especially after years of talk of renewed conflict and violence.
Even without a deliberate policy of armed confrontation,
fighting could well erupt as hotheads on all sides ramp up the rhetoric.
And it's this, perhaps more than anything else, that should worry observers.
Taken all together, one can certainly see why the situation at the moment
is so finely balanced and why so many people are worried.
25 years after the end of the war, Bosnia remains deeply divided.
The progress made in the initial decade after the Dayton Agreement has come under
increasing political strain as talk has grown about potential secession.
But while a unilateral declaration of independence
seems unlikely, what we seem to be seeing instead is a strategy of undermining the state
from within in the hope of winning back powers - potentially opening the way for later secession.
This is, in many ways, a far trickier problem to address.
An act of succession provides a clear target for action.
This is just a long, slow, painful process of wearing away at the fabric of the country.
More to the point, all this further feeds the sense that Bosnia is ultimately unsustainable.
For all these reasons, there's now a growing sense that we may well be in a race against time to save
the country from further destabilisation and perhaps even a disastrous return to conflict.
But even if this current crisis is resolved,
and fighting avoided, it seems it won't be the end of things.
The worry now is that Bosnia seems locked in a downward spiral.
I hope you found that useful. If so, here are some more videos that you might find interesting.
Thanks so much for watching and see you in the next video.