by Ivan Lovrenovic
Wolfgang Petritsch, the High Representative of the International
Community in B&H, explains why the country has reached a critical moment
in its development:
Dayton is not the New Testament
Two or three months ago, the four editors of the Sarajevo magazine
Dani (Senad Pecanin, Mile Stojic, Nerzuk Curak and the author of this
article) presented ten action points for Bosnia and Herzegovina.
The proposal was that Wolfgang Petritsch, the High
Representative of the International Community for BiH, by using the powers
vested in him by the Dayton Constitution, should relieve all the political
agencies of their duties for the period of one year.
In that time, he should introduce the "requirements of the
European integration process, and establish the principles for the
financially efficient organisation of the state agencies." In practice, this
meant that he should establish a one-year protectorate, thus saving the
country from the disaster to which the domestic ruling structure has
obviously been leading it.
Wolfgang Petritsch's response came soon enough. After having
analysed closely all the action points, he rejected the proposal, and once
again affirmed his concept of Ownership.
Q: Do you possibly have, Mr. Petritsch, also some personal, and
not only diplomatic-career motivation for Bosnia and Herzegovina and the
Balkans, having in mind your language background, your Southeast European
studies etc?
A: Of course. I was always looking for such job with which I
could completely identify myself. Of course, one cannot plan in advance
this kind of work - one cannot plan to become the High Representative for
Bosnia and Herzegovina. However, I can tell with pleasure that, after
having worked for 25 years publicly, now I happen to be in the situation
for the first time to be able to use the knowledge which I acquired while
I was studying the Southeast Europe and Balkans in the 19th century.
However, that is, I could say, a good theoretical base for my work here.
My stay in the USA and Paris for so many years allowed me to have a
practical insight into the possibilities for the expansion of the positive
influences of the western civilisation. I was born in that region of the
border where German and Slavic cultural influences are mixed and touched.
I grew up in a village with 16 houses and one church, where my mother ran
a restaurant. There was also a school with one classroom in which we were
all together, all of us from 6 to 14, and we attended the classes in two
languages in German and Slovenian. It was a real microcosm that was always
like a mirror to me, no matter where I happen to be - in New York,
Belgrade or now in Sarajevo. I was haunted by that everywhere, it was like
a proof that it is not only one, exclusive identity that is important. It
helped me a lot to understand that the multi-ethnic, multi-lingual and
multi-cultural systems are not and cannot be a problem, but essentially
the only right way to the future. And it was also like that in the former
Yugoslavia - its multi-cultural system and its multi-ethnicity were not
the problems, but on the contrary, the real problem was the war that was
being made against it.
The Power of Media
Q: In what way do you see the role of the public and media in
our political life?
A: A complete collapse of communication is in the bottom line
of any conflict. Whenever I have time enough I read again and again about
the history of the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina. There are, clearly,
many causes, many reasons, and a number of persons who were involved in
all of that. However, it is fascinating, and at the same time tragic to me
that it was not finished as a Greek drama with catharsis. When one looks
at it more closely, first the main actors can be identified, I mean the
political actors whose names are very well known. Whenever a worse
turnabout would happen, the reason was always the lack of communication,
the lack of understanding and readiness to hear what the other side has to
say, for a compromise to be found possibly. All of that, as it is well
known, used to happen in the context of exclusively ethnic, nationalistic
way of thinking. I see the beginning of the tragedy in the beginning of
90s, when the nationalist parties started cooperating. The only reason for
their cooperation was the struggle for power. That is the " eastern sin ":
one has no intention to look for the solution for citizens, for people.
Who will grab more political power was the only thought. It was the centre
of their thoughts, their interest. The media played out a big role in the
conflict, I mean in the ex-Yugoslav area. They were the way for conveying
of the nationalist, exclusive messages and made them stronger. They
suggested the public that there was no other solution but the war.
Q: Is our media culture significantly different today?
A: My answer is that media are a field that is in the very
centre of my work here. One of our most important tasks is to help the
media get transformed into a true democratic power, to become aware of
their true civilisation and civil function.
Q: Recently, you have been warning that Bosnia and Herzegovina
is in danger of economic disaster. It clearly includes the other aspects
too: social, psychological, moral....Can those processes be irreversible,
after which the country will not be able to recover for a long period of
time? And, generally speaking, what is, in your opinion, economic picture
of Bosnia and Herzegovina in the near future?
A: One should understand that this country is in a kind of
double transformation. First on the list is the repair of war damages, the
physical and psychological ones. I think that a lot has been done in the
light of physical reconstruction in the four years and a half. Our
capabilities in removing of the psychological damages, caused to the
people in the war, are much more limited. Now, four years and a half after
the peace agreement was signed, we have been going from the economy based
on offering help to the economy that will be based on investments. This is
the key moment in the development of Bosnia and Herzegovina and that is
the reason why I recently warned that there is an imminent threat of
crisis for Bosnia and Herzegovina. That was also the appeal to the people
in the country to get involved more actively in the reforms' processes. I
also mentioned another kind of transformation: it is the transformation
from the communist, commanding type of economy to the economy of free
market. I think one should talk about that so that people could become
aware and understand the importance of those problems. The reforms can be
successful only if people do tackle them.
Dayton on the scale
Q: The role and the function of the HR in B&H does not have a
previously tested model, it is brand new. How frustrating, or encouraging
is it for you?
A: I am very aware of how unique my situation in B&H is. We
have to be aware of the fact that this is a unique experiment in the
world. Neither the IC nor I, as the HR, should think that we are the only
ones who know how this society and state should look like. There is no
space for arrogance, there is no space for us to act as if we knew better.
At the same time, we should have no illusions about what is possible to be
done from the outside. From the very beginning, the most frequent words in
my vocabulary have been: We are here to help you. It was for this reason
that I introduced the concept of "ownership." It has been accepted very
controversially here. But I did it deliberately to provide for a start of
the process of sobering up. We in the IC think that the first stage,
physical reconstruction of the country, is much easier than the one at
which we currently are. It is much easier, for instance, to rebuild a
bridge than has a positive influence on the people's minds and hearts.
Physical infrastructure can be the basis for a society, but can never be
the goal itself. Thus, the success of the IC, in fact, depends on the
people here.
Q: I understand and respect your reluctance to make a problem
out of Dayton. However, one should feel free to raise the issue as to
whether the whole Dayton is a "system that cannot function," especially
when it comes to the encouragement of ethnical characteristics that are
certainly built into it.
A: In order to avoid any misunderstandings when it comes to me
and Dayton: I do not think of it in a theological manner. It is not the
New Testament, it is not a dogma! Moreover, I think an intellectual,
scientific and political discussion on Dayton is necessary and welcome in
the sense of pro et contra. However, I stand against political
instrumentalisation of such discourse, especially when it comes from the
nationalist parties. Each one of them has something else on their mind
when they speak about a change of or compliance with Dayton! It is always
about an effort to gain advantage or benefit for themselves or their
respective ethnic groups. As long as there is no spirit of compromise, as
long as they think of their respective ethnic groups without any regard to
the other two which are as important elements of the Dayton Agreement,
discussion on Dayton cannot be positive, nor can a change of it take
place. My position, in the capacity of the HR, is the implementation of
Dayton. I am convinced that there is space for corrections and
improvements within Dayton. However, there is no political will that would
lead to progress and prosperity for the citizens of B&H. Let us take the
refugee returns for instance! As you know, it is the very essence of
Dayton. It is for the people to get back to their homes, their land, and
to reverse what was created through ethnic cleansing, if I may use that
terrible word. Dayton sets no restrictions in that respect, on the
contrary, it encourages returns. Why, then, do we still have hundreds of
thousands of people who have not returned to their homes? The reason is in
the fact that many politicians in this country are still trying to wage
and win the war with different, political and bureaucratic means. It
cannot be changed with another Dayton Agreement! My view is that we should
be working on the full implementation of Dayton and once we come thus far,
then it will be up to the citizens of this country to make further
improvements and changes. In essence, this means - to change the
Constitution, and that is the normal path that is followed by all
democratic countries - changing and improving their constitutions through
amendments!
Votes for alternative
Q: Although the final municipal election results are not known
yet, two opposite interpretations of the elections' character have come up
so far. One is that it was an important and positive political change and
the other is that the results of the elections, in fact, cement the ethnic
division of the country. What is your opinion about this?
A: I will give you my personal opinion, as someone who comes
from the outside but is inside the country at the same time. First of all,
I do not think that we should judge the election results only on the basis
of ethnic structure. What is far more important is that they represent the
beginning of the functioning of the normal democratic "give and take"
principle. Here in the Federation, you can see on the example of the SDA
and the SDP that the persons in the SDP have discovered the true and
distinct alternative to the traditional ideological movement such as the
SDA. They raise different issues and have different approaches, the SDP is
simply a more modern party and has more Western style, and is not a mass
movement with ideological programme. Therefore, the people here had an
alternative and voted for it, which is a quite normal course of democratic
changes. In the Croat community, the people did not have such an explicit
and attractive alternative. And what did they do - they abstained from
voting and the voter's turnout was even under 40% in some areas. This
could be called an inter-step towards the political normalisation that has
happened to Bosniacs. When you take a closer look at the situation in the
RS, you can see fundamental changes. First I have to say that all the
processes in the RS are falling two years behind the Federation, following
the absolute obstruction that was conducted by Krajisnik and others. For
those reasons, all the assistance and efforts by the IC in the RS have not
had the same effect as they did in the Federation. One should bear another
thing in mind: the Serb nationalism, in my opinion, has a very pronounced
cultural aspect, in addition to the political aspect of it. This is why
the development is going at a slower pace in the RS, the development that
might lead to establishment of a multi-ethnic society and multi-ethnic
parties such as Lagumdzija's party. The difference is the same as that
between the democratic opposition in Serbia and the democratic opposition
in Croatia. Having all that in mind, I can say, still, that pluralisation
of the society in the RS is ongoing. We have Dodik's Independent Social
Democrats, we have a split within the SPRS, then Mladen Ivanic's new
party, which means that people have much choice. Of course, it would be
too much to expect them to become multi-ethnic overnight. We have to admit
that the society in the RS is still not ready for such a thing. However,
there are some things that indicate that they are going in that direction.
For instance, we have noted that Mladen Ivanic's party does not have the
attribute "Serb" in its name. It is a sort of symbolic progress.
Electoral progress
Q: Is that why it fared so bad at the elections?
A: Who knows... Let me sum up. The progress that has been made
in the country is different in the Federation and the RS, but in essence,
the society is not moving towards division, the State of B&H is not being
divided, but on the contrary, I think that certain consolidation is taking
place.
Q: Could you, at the end, tell us the answer to the question
that the B&H citizens are very much interested in: Is it known at this
time whether the general elections will be held in autumn?
A: It is well known that we wanted to hold the elections based
on the Election Law that would be passed by the domestic bodies. That
would be the first elections organised and financed by domestic bodies. We
have to say that it cannot happen yet because B&H is still not ready for
such a demonstration of democratic maturity. Therefore, the ball is again
in the court of the IC, and we will have to make the decision on the
ho g of the autumn elections in the coming few weeks. Apart from being
political, it is also a financial decision. We have to ask the OSCE member
countries whether they are ready and willing to organise and finance
ele ns once again
|