What role, if any, does external actors such as the European Union (EU) play in helping Bosnia and Herzegovina build their social capital?
“United Nothing…sorry, I meant United Nations” – Siege of Sarajevo Tour Guide
External actors are intrinsically involved in the Balkans region, specifically Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), during and after the war. During the Siege of Sarajevo tour, our humorous tour guide recalled how international organisations, like the United Nations (or in his words ‘United Nothing’), failed to stop the atrocities of the Serbs. His subtle joke could have hinted how some locals in Bosnia still lack faith in and remember the failure of external actors 25 years after the war. His sentiments were also echoed by Mr Hassan from the Srebrenica Genocide Memorial and Mr Hasan Nuhankovic, a genocide survivor. Both of them insisted on holding the Dutch accountable as the peacemakers handed refugees in the UN ‘safe area’ base over to the Bosnian Serb Army.
Yet, today, BiH find themselves in the process of joining another international organisation, the European Union (EU). Being geographically related to countries in the EU, it is not surprising that BiH sees the benefits of joining the EU. Just like how Dr Emir Hadžikadunić and Aleksandar Đurić who voiced support for BiH to join the EU prior to our trip, many stakeholders we met during the trip also shared the same opinion.
However, zooming into the idea of building social capital, do the people in Bosnia, including the politicians, trust that an external stakeholder can help BiH build bridges between different ethnic communities? Does (joining) the EU actually help BiH build social capital?
“The EU is not going to change its rules for Bosnia” – EU Representative
To answer those questions, let us first understand what are the relevant conditions that BiH must adhere to for them to join the EU. Under the EU’s Western Balkans enlargement strategy, BiH works closely with the EU to satisfy the 35 Chapters of the acquis. Those related to building social capital include re-establishing trust among different ethnic groups and ensuring that minority groups are protected without prejudice. As mentioned by the EU representative during our visit to the EU delegation, these rules are non-negotiable as “the EU is not going to change its rules for Bosnia”.
A specific area for improvement given by the EU representative was for BiH to change its presidential candidacy rules, especially in the Republic of Srpska where only the Serbs could run for presidency. Similar feedback was also given in the 2019 Commission Opinion on BiH’s application for membership of the EU, which states that “The right to stand for election to the House of Peoples is restricted on the basis of ethnicity and residence, which is in breach of European standards.”
These legislations incentivise politicians to stage greater divide between different ethnic groups by playing the ‘ethnic-card’ to remain in power. Such legislations thus impede the efforts of other stakeholders which contribute to the building of trust between ethnic communities.
Here, we see the EU as an external watchdog that identifies, corrects and guides BiH to build social capital using a largely top-down approach of suggesting legislative changes. But, are such measures effective in forming bridges and linkages between different ethnic groups in BiH, especially when there is a lack of political will from the government?
Implementation vs Enforcement – Can the EU truly help BiH to build social capital?
We hold a rather pessimistic view that the EU is not truly helping BiH build social capital among different ethnic groups, as shown in various studies which have concluded that ‘external agencies cannot directly develop social capital’ (Krishna 2007). The inherent difference between implementation and enforcement, when it comes to legislative changes and societal mindsets, makes this top-down approach less effective in building social capital in BiH.
Granted, the EU sets out progressive rules that, if enforced fully, can forge a common identity of being a ‘Bosnian’. This shared identity can help to build social capital among communities in BiH.
Alas, the reality is usually far from the ideal.
Many of the Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks living in BiH, especially those who have gone through the war, cannot relate to this common identity of a ‘Bosnian’. Removing laws that explicitly favours one ethnicity over another does not equate to an acceptance of all ethnicities in the society – the lack of enforcement is unlikely to cause a change in attitudes and behaviour (Bilz 2013).
This idea can be likened to discussion regarding the LGBTQ+ community. Our exchange with the students from the University of Sarajevo (Faculty of Political Science) shed light on how enforcement differs largely from implementation. They shared that many locals, especially the older generation, were still against LGBTQ+ lifestyles, despite the presence of anti-discriminatory laws in BiH.
While the legislation is in place (and even if the LGBTQ+ and EU flags are hung symbolically beside each other), the enforcement of such laws is a totally separate issue on its own. Similarly, given the current state of affairs in BiH, the society is far from ethnic tolerance, let alone acceptance, regardless of any legislative changes. Deep-rooted ideology of the ‘us against the others’ mindset remain prevalent among communities and politicians in BiH.
Thus, will the implementation of the EU accession chapters, such as protecting the rights of the minorities in BiH, help to change this outdated mindset of Bosnians? Probably not.
This is the stark contrast between implementation and enforcement. More on-the-ground work is required for a change in societal mindsets so as to establish bridges and linkages in BiH.
“Bosnia is handicapped” – Finance Minister, Mr Amel Kovacevic
Nevertheless, we acknowledge that asking BiH to simultaneously satisfy the 35 Chapters of the acquis can be a tall order for a country who is still struggling to step out of the shadows of the brutal war. Mr Amel Kovacevic, the local Finance Minister, also truthfully admitted that “Bosnia is handicapped” and is unlikely to meet all of the standards of the EU. It is therefore not surprising that BiH is falling behind in the race to join the EU among its Balkans neighbours.
However, not all hope is lost.
We see that the EU has been assisting BiH to adapt to new reforms. Apart from investing economic resources in BiH, ground-up initiatives can be seen where the EU engages schools and the society-at-large so as to bridge the gap between the divided Serbs, Croats and Bosniaks. The EU representative also shared that Islamic programmes were initiated for youths to be “multipliers of EU values in BiH”.
These ground initiatives put forth by the EU confers Bosnians monetary resources and valuable platforms that provide them opportunities to work together to foster trust, expand their networks and engage in collective actions to build bridges and develop social capital across communities (Dongier 2002).
Most importantly, the willingness of the Bosnians must match the resources invested by the EU to ensure that mindsets will change gradually, while social capital is built overtime.
Does BiH still needs or wants to join the EU?
Acceding to the EU’s accession criteria will likely shake the foundations that served as an effective stopgap measure to cease the war – the 1995 Dayton Peace Agreement. However, these changes seem necessary as some may argue that the peace agreement is failing in terms of how it is hindering BiH’s building of social capital today by reinforcing ethnic division.
Today, it is no longer a dichotomy for BiH of joining the EU or not. Alternatives to the EU are now available – Russia, China or even other external actors – and they do offer attractive economic benefits without many strings attached. While external actors will remain relevant in building social capital in BiH, it is clear that the term ‘external actor’ will no longer only refer to the EU in the future.
Bibliography
Bilz, Kenworthey. 2013. “Law, Moral Attitudes, and Behavioral Changes.” Oxford Handbook of Behavioral Economics & the Law Forthcoming. https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2292051.
Dongier, Philippe. 2002. “Community-Driven Development.” Poverty Reduction Strategy Paper (World Bank). http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTPRS1/Resources/383606-1205334112622/5805_chap9.pdf.
Krishna, Anirudh. 2007. “How Does Social Capital Grow? A Seven-Year Study of Villages in India.” The Journal of Politics 69 (4): 941-956. doi:https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2508.2007.00600.x.
Comments