peacefare.net

More in sadness than anger

I suppose I should resist the temptation to respond to International Crisis Group’s latest wrong-headedness. I’ve got friends at ICG and a great deal of respect for the fine work they have done in the past, and continue to do in many parts of the world. But that would disappoint my Balkan readers.  So here goes.

ICG’s account of what was agreed between Republika Srpska President Dodik and EU High Representative Ashton is not the same as what Dodik says was agreed.  ICG says Dodik agreed to cancel the referendum.  What he says he agreed is the following:

…we think that the referendum is not necessary for the time being. The conclusions present a political position of the National Assembly of Republika Srpska [RSNA], but they will be reconsidered in the light of this agreement on structural dialogue.

This sounds more like a postponement than a cancellation to me, and he confirmed that in public on May 17. The promised reconsideration of the RSNA conclusions falls far short of what Lady Ashton sought, which was their withdrawal. The RSNA is proceeding very slowly even on reconsideration.

ICG goes on to say that “The deal is hard to fit into Bosnia’s political narrative.” That is true only if you have not understood Bosnia’s political narrative, which is one in which RS is aiming to enhance its legitimacy and prestige while demonstrating the ineffectiveness and irrelevance of the state institutions in Sarajevo. This deal fits perfectly into that narrative, as it enabled Dodik as RS president to begin dealing directly with the EU on issues of importance to the state, including not only the referendum but also the future “structured dialogue” on the state’s judicial institutions. To add insult to injury from the perspective of the state institutions, that dialogue will be conducted by the EU’s enlargement commissioner beginning in Banja Luka. I don’t know whether state officials will be invited (nor am I sure it would be wise for them to attend if they are).

ICG then declares the EU and Bosnia the winners. I’ll defer to their better judgment on the EU, though to me it looks as if Ashton got a good deal less than half a loaf. I don’t see any win for Bosnia and Herzegovina here. No legally valid referendum was going to happen: the international community High Representative Valentin Inzko was going to invalidate the law under which it would have been called. Nor is the referendum question one that would stand up to judicial scrutiny anywhere but North Korea (and, of course, RS).

People are asking me how it is that ICG has gone so far off the tracks in Bosnia. I don’t know the answer to that question. But it seems to me the fundamental error of judgment they are making has to do with EU capability. ICG is happy with the Ashton/Dodik deal because it emarginated the High Representative, whom they view as an obstacle to Bosnia’s democratic development and progress toward EU membership. I am inclined to agree that it is time for the EU to take over in Bosnia, but I’d like to see better performance at handling the issues than what happened on this occasion.