Last week, Clinton stooge and Dayton Accords author Richard Holbrooke wrote an alarmist editorial that has slowly been gaining international media attention, wherein he expressed great concern over the continued existence of Bosnia. He offered a number of diplomatic remedies that might, according to him, prevent what seems like the otherwise inevitable collapse of another state in the Balkans. As was noted, the reason behind his article is that he regards the continued existence of modern Bosnia as essential. Rather than defend this position, this is an assertion he takes for granted, which ought not be the case. Truth be told, Bosnia has no historical legitimacy, is irrational in construct, and has been destined to fail from the start. While collapse of a state is rarely beneficial, especially in the powder keg of Europe, the way this situation is approached must be grounded in an appreciation for the region’s history and the present day realities, neither of which Holbrooke appears to firmly grasp.
Bosnia is not a nation of historic validity, but a disputed buffer region between the competing Serbian and Croatian nations, each of whom have legitimate claims to substantial portions of the land. Accordingly, it has been of a multi-ethnic character for centuries, and remains so today. However, this fuels substantial conflict in a region where multi-ethnic states have often proven themselves to be breeding grounds for violence and genocide, the overwhelming majority of which has always been directed against the Serbs. In a half-baked effort to pacify this battleground nation, the Dayton Accords created a federal system wherein there is a relatively weak national government, and two much stronger state governments. Republika Srpska hosts the nation’s sizable Serbian population, while the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina hosts the remaining Bosniak and Croat populations.
After many years of brutal warfare and chaos, both sides set national ambitions aside and worked together to rebuild. But, as seemed fairly obvious to any individual with a grasp of the true nature of the Balkans, this was short lived. Though we have not yet seen war, the rhetoric has become increasingly polarized. Those in the Federation have been pushing for drastic reforms that would shift all of the power into a strong central government, where they would make up the majority of the population and could thus run roughshod over the rights of the Serbian minority. In turn, this has inspired the highly moderate government of Republika Srpska to extend legitimacy to the idea of ending Bosnia, by way of becoming independent (or more reasonably merging with Serbia), should the need arise.
As the nation exists today, it is a tense union between two unlike factions with highly divergent agendas and interests. So why continue to prop it up? If the only justification is Balkans stability then the answer is not to add to the hasty patchwork keeping Bosnia as one nation, but to proactively develop and implement a more rational and permanent solution. That means separating Republika Srpska from the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina immediately, merging the former with Serbia. But what to do with the latter? Allowing it to become independent as is would be dangerous, since quite naturally the Croats would seek reunion with the motherland, and inspire yet another bloody conflict. As it happens, the ethnic divisions are presently such that the Croatian-dominated portions could be given to Croatia without much issue, allowing the Bosniaks to have a new state of their own. Wedged between the powers of the region, it would be kept in check, and its ability to provide a breeding ground for jihad and Islamism would be reduced by threat of invasion from the concerned neighbor states (this will be elaborated on in a future column).
The Balkans are messed up, but that doesn't mean that an entire nation's identity has to be thrown to the wolves. And yes, it's horrible to see what happened to Serbia as well, just as it is horrible too see the things in Bosnia and Croatia. I don't see that separation is the solution, though. It never is.
Bosnia is a EU colony and will eventually split between Srbija nad Hrvatska.And the Muslims will get what we leave them.
I live in Belgrade and before coming here I also believed most of the propaganda that western puppet media fed us. But I've seen with my own eyes what NATO has done here, destroying a country's infrastructure and bombing random houses in random villages. They cluster bombs and depleted uranium. Humanitairy military internvention?
How can you force people to live in 'country' if they don't want to? Holbrooke is a piece of sh*t and only trying to save his 'reputation'. For America it's all about the oil anyway. As for Aleks: most articles in the world are anti-Serb because that was the agenda in the 90's: blame the Serbs for everything that happened. Designate them as Nazis and the muslims of Bosnia as the new Jews. Everything to get everyone onboard to defend the illusion of multi-culturalism of Europe and to get the new Left onboard to attack Serbia. Did Serbs do warcrimes? Yes indeed and very horrible ones. But so did the Croats, the muslims, the Kosovar Albanians and also the West and NATO.
But the Serbs didn't start it. The Croats first starting ethnical cleansing and everybody knew that a declaration of independence by Bosnia would result in civil war. So why did they do it then? Because America made them.
As for Bulgaria: They are not popular in Serbia. Also in Greece you're not popular, I've spoken to Greek people in Greece this summer. Bulgaria is also not very popular in Macedonia. So don't kid youself. And no, I'm not Serb.
in a just world, Bosnia and Kosovo should both be divided and ALL people allowed to make democratic decisions for themselves. Setting aside money to relocate people stuck in Geograpgically hostile enclaves would truly bring peace. Unfortunately Washingotn doesn't want peace or stablility. If there was no conflict to exploit, It would be counter-productive to the policy of exerting influence and control in the region .