Unfinished Business in Bosnia: What is to be done?
Kurt Bassuener June 9th, 2009
USIPeace Briefing - Unfinished Business in Bosnia and Herzegovina: What is to be Done?
On April 3rd, DPC Senior Associates Kurt Bassuener and James Lyon attended a policy briefing on international policy toward Bosnia and Hercegovina hosted by the US Institute of Peace in Washington, DC.
In late May, USIP published a USIPeace Briefing written by Bassuener and Lyon reviewing both the proceedings and then presenting the authors’ view on what the US-EU joint strategy must be. This paper was followed by two papers with alternate points of view on the necessary approach - also available at the link above. Bassuener and Lyon’s briefing is available in PDF format above.
Dear Mr. Bassuener and Lyon,
I began reading your first report on Bosnia and Herzegovina, and it struck me that there were no Bosnian voices among the participants of the policy roundtable. It would seem like a fundamental flaw of any report that bases its recommendations on a discussion conducted without the presence of the central stakeholders in the matter - the Bosnian people.
If there were no Bosnians at the table, why not?
If for years, the situation is not improving and in fact, deteriorating in Bosnia, maybe it’s time to try something innovative, something that should have been done in Dayton and in every round table since then, is bring the Bosnian people into the picture. You know, Dodik, or Silajdzic or the handful of other “leaders” cannot and must not be the only voices that are loud and considered. If the “leaders” are not doing their part and making sure that they run the country responsibly, then the international community should do something about that. What you can do (and in my opinion, have the responsibility to do) is get the people at the table.
Bring the conversation to the people, since their leaders aren’t, and are instead abusing the privilege they have been granted by virtue of their positions. And don’t pay them lip service, either.
Their interests should be central to the discussion. It is not sufficient to simply acknowledge that the Bosnian “leaders” are not fulfilling their duties to the Bosnian people. They are supposed to represent the best interest of the people and, for the sake of the discussion, let’s assume that return to war is NOT in the best interest of the Bosnian people.
Responsible foreign engagement must in such a case focus on creating an enabling environment and hear the views of those that are directly affected by the decisions and recommendations issued on the basis of the round table - the Bosnian people. Any discussion (and the resulting recommendations) without active and meaningful involvement and representation of the people of Bosnia, and especially those whose lives are particularly difficult, women, minorities, persons with disabilities, veterans. It is the policy-makers’ responsibility to create conditions where they will meaningfully contribute to the discussion. They may point to solutions that haven’t been considered before.
Most importantly, though, for all involved, is that their views will help craft real policies that maybe, just maybe, result in real positive change. But only if positive change in fact is the goal of the policies discussed. In my opinion, it should be the central goal of such policy making.