UNDERMINING SECULAR STATE IN BOSNIA-HERZEGOVINA - December 22, 2008

Whatever the initial utility or virtue of the Dayton Accords, the current impact is

to undermine the principles of the secular state in Bosnia & Herzegovina, (BiH).

Contrary to the stated objectives to support the values of an open, pluralistic, democratic, secular state as well as deliver peace, the current tide of the Dayton Accords, more specifically, Annex 4 comprising the "Dayton Constitution," is to further the forces of parochialism, in effect a post-modern feudalism.  

THE ILLUSION OF CENTRALIZATION

Focus has been bestowed upon efforts and processes to enlarge the competencies of the central government of BiH. While certainly some of the credit is deserved, the success has been largely illusory in promoting an open and pluralistic society as well as in reintegrating the country. The actual power continues to vest within the "entities" of BiH and the political parties directly associated therewith. The ethnic definition of such entities, particularly Republika Srpska, is not based upon historical delineation, but rather the consequences of genocidal ethnic cleansing. Republika Srpska, (RS), which by name translates into exclusivity as the Republic of the Serbs, is historically unprecedented in a multi-ethnic BiH and around half of the pre-ethnic cleansed population of its currently bestowed territory consisted of Bosniaks, (Bosnian Muslims), Croats, (Catholics) and other non-Serbs. (Contrary to the terms of the Dayton Accords, discouraged by overt and implicit exclusion and bias, political, economic, personal security and religious observance, only a fraction of this non-Serb population has returned to this territory renamed by the perpetrators of ethnic cleansing as "Republika Srpska.")   

Since ethnicity is almost exclusively defined by religious affiliation, this has served to delineate BiH along denominational lines and thereby explicitly and implicitly undercut the claim of a secular state. Geographic regions, as well as political parties defined by exclusionary ethnic, (religious), labels have come to characterize the political temperament of BiH under the "Dayton Constitution."

It may appear paradoxical that while the central government is being conferred additional competencies that the state in fact is less functional, reintegrated or secular. The addition of such competencies has largely held a topical character, since real power continues to be conferred by the current application of the Dayton Accords upon ethnically defined political institutions and parties as well as the "entities." From eligibility of political candidates to economics, critical authority is directly linked to ethnicity. Under the current application of the Dayton Constitution, only a Serb can be a candidate from Republika Srpska to the collective state Presidency. Those defined as "others" including Jews would not qualify to hold this highest office from either entity, although a Jew has been appointed BiH's Foreign Minister by the Bosniak, (Bosnian Muslim), member of the Presidency. Other rights and privileges are implicitly if not explicitly linked to ethnicity, (religion). This ranges from practical to emblematic including government symbolism, (flags, anthems, ceremonial rituals etc).  At some level, conferring more competencies upon the central government undermines that very state and secularism since it also implicitly or explicitly awards additional power upon the existing political constant defined by ethnicity, de-facto religious labels). 

DEFINED BY VERTICAL HIERARCHY INTERTWINING RELIGION AND POLITICS

In hindsight, it is evident that the ultra-nationalist vision of BiH mostly dictated by forces from outside of BiH during the Dayton talks, has prevailed in the application of the Accords. As a reaction to the plot set out by Slobodan Milosevic and Radovan Karadzic or otherwise, ethnic chauvinism is triumphant under current application of Annex 4, the "Dayton Constitution." The "Dayton Constitution" was crafted during the Dayton talks with the overriding influence of non-BiH based interests promoting separatist, parochial agendas. The choice was between accepting extortive political demands that effectively undermined the state of BiH or the perpetuation of genocide and aggression. (This unpalatable option, with BiH citizens as hostages to this political extortion, was not lost upon me or the potential for this regressive model of BiH. Whether the US and European mediators were also mindful of the potential effect of this dimension of the Dayton Accords, the practical result was a de-facto legitimization of ethnic cleansing and the non-secular political model born there from where geographic regions, institutions and parties, are now defined by ethnic or rather religious tags. Even the remnants of the old communist political elite are similarly branded by their non-adherence).

The political parties, as much as some may try to avoid ethnic, (religious), definition, nonetheless are compelled by the struggle for votes and power to reflect the vertical hierarchy imposed by the current interpretation of the Dayton Accords. Ultimately, power is vested and political discipline is exercised based upon the reality of this vertical hierarchy. The role of religious institutions does not have to be proactive in this anti-secular trend. Rather, theology and religious symbolism as well as figures can be (mis)appropriated by political as well as religious authority to serve whatever worldly ends are sought by the status-quo.

Several religious institutions and figures within BiH have attempted to undertake a positive role in promoting communal harmony and the reintegration of BiH. Some have even been strengthened by their international standing. Most have affirmatively voiced their support for the model of a secular as well as reintegrated, pluralistic state for BiH. Regardless, such statements and efforts can not counterbalance the lure and reality of ethnic, religious stratification disciplined most effectively by the current application as well as "discussions on reform" surrounding the Dayton Constitution. As much as we may wish to ignore it and some of the promoters may wish to avoid it, the greatest impediment toward the progressive implementation of the overall Dayton Accords has been the Dayton Constitution, Annex 4, which hardens and legitimizes ethnic stratification and undermines secular state methodologies. The Dayton Constitution cannot be relied upon as the foundation to progressive reform.

FEDERALISM OR FEUDALISM

The affect of the Dayton Accords, or more accurately Annex 4, the Dayton Constitution is regressive rather than merely static. Witnessing that the guardians of Dayton are not willing to challenge Republika Srpska and its parochial ethnic, religious character, certain Bosnian/Herzegovinian Croat political leaders and parties have been now again pressing for "their own entity" to be ethnically defined and carved out from BiH.

Perhaps one could argue that such has logic in the context of a new federalism that could come to define the internal structure of BiH. However, this notion of federalism would at best be a device to achieve a further delineation along ethnic, (religious) lines. It would ultimately further the post-modern feudalism that is strangling the values of a secular state. The Bosniaks, (Bosnian Muslims), would also be prompted to advance their own stratification along ethnic, religious lines. This probably would bring into question the character but also the rationale for a BiH defined by the current application of the Dayton Constitution.

THE BALANCE IS LEANING AWAY FROM A SECULAR STATE

There is no absolute secular state. In Germany, church financing is intertwined with that of the state. In the United States, the US Congress initiates sessions with a prayer. Some American colonies that evolved into the United States were in fact begun as a refugee for particular religious groups centuries earlier. However, today, there is no truly secular state where also eligibility to be a candidate or serve in particular office is limited by religious identity. In BiH, unfortunately the balance indicates something other than either a progressive or secular state.

In BiH it is unavoidable and probably desirable to have political authority allocated to some degree by ethnicity, and equitably. This should help advance the sense of all having a vested interest, belonging to the state of BiH. However, the current application of the Dayton Accords goes too far beyond the definition and dynamics of a secular state, and it does not promote this sense of loyalty or even belonging to BiH. Rather it has been usurped to promote ethnic chauvinism where identity is, and in some instances aggressively and with discipline, linked to ethnicity, (religion), at the total detriment of a shared, pluralistic, open, democratic and secular state.

The greatest obstacle to the ultimate success of the Dayton Accords in advancing an open, democratic, reintegrated, pluralistic and secular state ironically has become the "Dayton Constitution," as currently applied.

Muhamed Sacirbey

--------------------

Author was a Signatory of the Dayton Accords and Foreign Minister of Bosnia-Herzegovina.

--------------------