OPINION: Building Stronger Communities: Genocide and War in Modern Europe, the case of Bosnia-Herzegovina

 

Building Stronger Communities:

Genocide and War in Modern Europe: Bosnia-Herzegovina

It was on Valentine’s Day, 1948, when Winston Churchill made his famous plea, ‘asking the nations of Europe between whom rivers of blood have flowed to forget the feuds of a thousand years.’[1] It was a plea made to the backdrop of the most catastrophic war Europe and indeed the world, had ever seen. Amongst the greatest of calamities that befell the world between 1939-45 was the Holocaust, the systematic attempt to exterminate the Jewish people and other such people deemed undesirable by the Nazi regime. Yet neither war nor genocide were unique to the European continent in the early twentieth century. Armenians, Pontic Greeks and Ukrainians had all suffered genocidal violence prior to World War Two. So too had Europe experienced war: the Balkan Wars, World War One, Russian civil war, Irish civil war, Spanish civil war, to name a few. Thus, when Churchill made his plea for peace in 1948, what hope did he truly have? We cannot know, but in a rebut to historical precedence, the rate and scale of European based wars slowed. Genocide halted. The major ulcer in this trend, prior to the Russian invasion of Ukraine, was the Yugoslavian Wars and the resulting Bosnian genocide of 1992-95.     

The wars following the breakup of Yugoslavia were a messy affair, that birthed the contemporary states of Serbia, Montenegro, Slovenia, Croatia, North Macedonia and of course, Bosnia and Herzegovina. The details of this conflict are reserved for more authoritative accounts, but the basis can be simplified as so. Serb nationalists wished for the continuation and centralisation of the multi-ethnic Yugoslav state. The other respective nationalities drifted between a want for greater autonomy and outright independence. The difficulty comes not only with reconciling two diametrically opposed viewpoints, but with the very real difficulty of practically dividing a state upon ethnic lines, that is as diverse as the former Yugoslavia. For example, see the map below, which highlights the demographics of Yugoslavia, as recorded in the 1981 census.[2]

With the exemption of Slovenia in the north, there is almost no contemporary state lines that when placed upon the map, form a homogenous state. In no such area is (was) there more diversity than in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Thus, even at a basic level, a translation of demographics into state identities is impracticable if not impossible.

However, despite the nuances and intricacies of Western Balkan politics, demographics and religious divides, these are not problems unique to the former Yugoslavia. Indeed, Europe itself, as previously mentioned, has been a hotbed of ethnic, racial and religious division, from the Magyars of Transylvania to the innately divided Flemish and Walloons of Belgium. The difference being that none of these state divides in the post war era (without ignoring the war crimes in Ukraine, genocide is not a label officially attributed to the conflict) have resulted in genocide. Though the reasons and causes behind this anomaly are undoubtedly multifaceted, there is a case that NATO and EU expansion have facilitated the easing of century old tensions. Indeed, if France and Germany are to be taken as an example, from 1870 to 1945, three major wars were fought, resulting in millions dead and countless atrocities. The key controversy between Franco-Deutsch relations being the province of Alsace-Lorraine. A controversy that no longer exists, in large part due to the 1958 Treaty of Rome.[3] Ever since EU formation, the borders between states have become porous whilst political goals have aligned. It begs the question; would the genocide have occurred if both Bosnia and Serbia were integrated within both the EU and NATO?           

Indeed, the promulgation of violence in Europe post-cold-war has been almost the sole recluse of states outside of the EU. Be it the Yugoslavian Wars, the Russian invasion of Georgia, the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict or the Russia invasion of Ukraine. It is not to suggest that the EU is the vehicle through which all conflict can be resolved – as that is certainly not the case, but it is certainly a factor to be considered. To preserve peace on the European mainland, the EU should pursue active integration with Western Balkan states.

If there were ever a more pragmatic argument for the reconciliation of Serb and Bosniak, then it would be the failure of violence to provide solutions to such deep-rooted issues. In the case of the Yugoslavian Wars and the Bosnian genocide, can Serbia, to any degree, claim victory? Indeed, this argument can be expanded further, did NATO’s war in Afghanistan bare fruit? Is Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine (one he believed would only last a matter of weeks) proving a success? As a student of both history and politics it is prudent to remember that war has had its share of decisive campaigns, but Serbia has no such realistic prospect, especially with a reinvigorated NATO and a depleted Russia.

This leads me to the less tangible aspect of my analysis. Institutions and pragmatism are all well and good. Undoubtedly both would help the healing of Bosnia and Serbia. Nonetheless, both geopolitical pragmatism and institutions can be prone to fail. In 1995, Yugoslavia as an institution had failed. In the massacre at Srebrenica, where over 8,000 Bosnians were murdered in cold blood,  geopolitical pragmatism failed.[4] Humanity failed. So, what is the solution? It is not always clear, even with the blessings of hindsight. Yet one thing that is clear is there has to be a greater respect for our fellow human beings. Religion, ethnicity, language, creed – there has to be a separation between these factors and the dignity that should be innately given, not earned, to fellow human beings. The Building Stronger Communities programme that I have embarked upon has not only sharpened my knowledge on the tragedies of the Bosnian genocide but illuminated the importance we all have in preventing these horrors. It may seem strange to suggest that we all have such an important role. But the truth is that genocide begins with small things. It begins with generalisations. It begins with hateful whispers. It begins with words. And to this degree, we all have a role in genocide prevention. In an age of social media where we all have a voice that can span the world, we would do well to remember that.

---

[1] W. Nester, Winston Churchill and the Art of Leadership (2020).

[2] United States Central Intelligence Agency, Peoples of Yugoslavia, https://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/1196128 (Accessed: 03/06/2023).

[3] W. Urwin, Derek, The Community of Europe: A History of European Integration Since 1945 (Routledge, 2014).

[4] A. Hoare Marko, ‘Bosnia and Herzegovina: Genocide, Justice and Denial’, Centre for Advances Studies, (2015).