I remember December 1, 1997, as a crucial and so far one of the most important days in my life. This was the day I left for Bosnia and Herzegovina to become a member of the SFOR Peacekeeping Mission. Today on December 1, 2001, I look back to this first adventure of my life. Still I am trying to figure out what caused these cruel deeds and this furious devastation of a whole and formerly relatively prosperous country. Things I could see and experience there brought up to me the idea to discuss the initial reasons for this particular war, which had become one of the bloodiest events in Europe’s contemporary history. Despite all the subsequent crises in the region, an area known throughout history to be cause of numerous conflicts and wars – as BISMARCK once said being not worth the bones of one of his soldiers1 – it might be further deserving to devote the later part of this paper discussing the actual setting and feasible future deve lopment. Literature gives a broad overview of political explanations for the conflicts in former Yugoslavia, which became frequently apparent during the last years and crises. Despite the fact, that in the media the terms ethnicity and nationalism was used extensively, there are only few attempts to explain the pre-war situation by these phrases. Therefor the objective of the following chapter will be a clarification of the terms in regard to the particular situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina shortly before the war. In conclusion it might be suitable to make some remarks on the actual situation regarding the ethnical combination as well as the impact of refugee migration on the territory of the country in comparison to the pre-war status and the persuading outcomes eventually resulting out of this.
However, the observer should be aware, that the examinations often lack discreet evidence; in the words of NASH: “But even this phrasing of the search for universals in group loyalties and boundary maintaining mechanisms is difficult to spin into empirical relevant sentences”2. This proves much more valid in regard to the fragmentary settlement and diversity of the respective ethnicity in the pre-war Bosnia (see also the attached map of 1991 census).
[...]
______
1 Bismarck (1922).
2 Nash (1989), p. 4.
Table of Contents
1. Introduction
2. Collapse
2.1 Ethnicity
2.1.1 Definition of Ethnicity and Ethnic Groups
2.1.2 Ethnicity and Ethnic Groups in the pre-war Period
2.2 Nationalism and Nation
2.2.1. Attempts of definition
2.2.2 Bosnian Peculiarities
3. War
4. Cease-Fire
4.1 Post-war settlement
4.2 Reconciliation or Alternatives
5. Future – Conclusion and Perspectives
Objectives and Core Themes
This paper examines the initial causes of the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, specifically analyzing the role of ethnicity and nationalism in the context of the pre-war situation. The primary goal is to clarify these fundamental terms while assessing the impact of forced migration and the resulting challenges for post-war societal reconciliation.
- The theoretical definition and categorization of ethnicity and ethnic groups.
- The historical and social evolution of nationalist ideologies within the Yugoslav federation.
- The specific socio-political factors that contributed to the outbreak of the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
- An evaluation of the Dayton Peace Accord’s impact on minority returns and ethnic homogenization.
- Perspectives on the future of a multi-ethnic state structure in a post-conflict environment.
Excerpt from the Book
2.1.1 Definition of Ethnicity and Ethnic Groups
According to a non-sociologist definition the term may shortly be described as an institution, relationship, or self-definition, significantly distinctive from other cultures or civilisations by its habits and its customs establishing a more or less closed social constellation. Yet, BARTH offers a more anthropological definition. Accordingly an ethnic group is a population, which is largely biologically self-perpetuating, sharing fundamental cultural values, making up a certain field of communication and interaction, and whose members identify themselves, but also are defined by others as constituting a category distinguishable from other categories.
ERIKSEN, in contrast, determinates the approach to the extent, that ethnicity “has something to do with the classification of people and group relations”. BARTH emphasises the culture bearing function of ethnic groups, though he refrains from delimiting the cultural aspect of individuals to the overall character of the group. In like manner this implies the concept of ethnical boundaries. Hence, boundaries are necessary to define and distinguish between the social groups, considering themselves being of different ethnicity, i.e. identity.
However, the variety of categorisation is simply a result of sheer existence and social interaction of human beings. Thus, the particular objectives and cultural features establishing the basic identity of the individual gain only importance or relevance, if an observer claims these cultural aspects relevant to belong to the ethnic group. Correspondingly, the ethnic group defines itself, and is defined, only in contrast to other at least dissimilar considered groups.
Summary of Chapters
1. Introduction: The author outlines his personal motivation for studying the Bosnian conflict and sets the objective to clarify the roles of ethnicity and nationalism in the pre-war period.
2. Collapse: This chapter analyzes definitions of ethnicity and nation, exploring how historical identities and religious affiliations contributed to the erosion of the Bosnian state.
3. War: The chapter examines the eruption of the conflict, focusing on the failure of the communist identity and the rise of exclusionary nationalism.
4. Cease-Fire: This section evaluates the post-war situation, specifically how the Dayton Peace Accord failed to successfully facilitate the return of refugees and reversed ethnic homogenization.
5. Future – Conclusion and Perspectives: The final chapter reflects on the viability of Bosnia and Herzegovina as a federal state, emphasizing that rational coexistence is the only realistic path forward.
Keywords
Bosnia and Herzegovina, Ethnicity, Nationalism, Ethnic Cleansing, Dayton Peace Accord, Yugoslav Federation, Identity, Forced Migration, Reconciliation, Multi-ethnicity, Nation-state, SFOR, Sarajevo, Conflict, Post-war settlement.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is the fundamental focus of this research paper?
The paper focuses on the root causes of the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, specifically how concepts of ethnicity and nationalism were used to shape the pre-war social and political landscape.
What are the primary themes discussed in the work?
The central themes include the anthropological definitions of ethnic groups, the historical development of national identities in the Balkans, the breakdown of the Yugoslav federation, and the socio-political implications of ethnic cleansing.
What is the central research question?
The work seeks to clarify how the specific ethnic composition and the interplay of nationalism influenced the pre-war state of Bosnia and why these factors ultimately led to a violent fragmentation of the country.
Which scientific methods are utilized by the author?
The author employs a literature-based analysis, drawing upon anthropological, sociological, and political science theories—such as those of Barth, Eriksen, and Gellner—to contextualize historical and empirical data about the Bosnian conflict.
What topics are covered in the main body of the paper?
The main body covers the definitions of ethnicity, the specific cultural and historical peculiarities of Bosnia, the causes of the war's outbreak, and an analysis of the post-war challenges under the Dayton Peace Accord.
Which keywords best characterize the research?
Key terms include ethnicity, nationalism, Dayton Peace Accord, ethnic cleansing, Bosnian identity, and federalism.
How does the author define an ethnic group in the context of this study?
The author refers to Barth's anthropological definition, describing an ethnic group as a largely self-perpetuating population that shares cultural values and is defined both by internal self-identification and external categorization.
What conclusion does the author draw regarding the future of Bosnia?
The author concludes that while full integration remains optimistic, the most viable path for a prosperous future is an organized, rational coexistence between the different ethnic groups rather than forced assimilation.
- Quote paper
- Heiko Bubholz (Author), 2002, Ethnicity, Nation and Nationalism in Bosnia and Hercegovina in the war and after, Munich, GRIN Verlag, https://www.grin.com/document/5539
