Search results

Three decades have passed since the beginning of the war, which ravaged Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), and the state finds itself once again in the quagmire of partitioning. In terms of high diplomacy, it is described as the worst crisis since the signing of the Dayton Peace Agreement (1995), which still needs to be consolidated and fully legitimised. The international document that stopped the bloodshed and, at the same time, plunged the state into a tortuous citizenship abyss made of political contradictions, together with an institutional framework instrumentalised as a fertile ground for stabilitocracy and geostrategic influence games. The war in Ukraine has revived the international community's interest in BiH, forcing it to take firmer stances. This article aims to analyse the recent events in BiH and the European Union (EU)'s strategy in light of its complex relationship based on coherence and inconsistency and the idea of security. The research questions whether the EU will take advantage of the lessons learned in the bloody nineties to resolve frozen conflicts. Answers are provided through an argumentative research design comprising a qualitative analysis of the institutional structure of BiH and the review of the interrelationships between the state and the triggers of local, regional and international instability with a special focus on the EU. The Ukraine scenario shows how quickly frozen conflicts start burning.

In May 1993, at the height of the wars in the former Yugoslavia, the United Nations' Security Council established the International Criminal Tribunal for the Former Yugoslavia (ICTY). It did so in response to international outrage at evidence of war crimes being committed with impunity and on a scale unprecedented in Europe since World War II. The Statute empowered the ICTY to prosecute persons responsible for serious violations of international humanitarian law committed in the territory of the former Yugoslavia since 1 January 1991, in accordance with its provisions.The ICTY was established by the Security Council rather than the General Assembly because it was thought that the situation in the former Yugoslavia was too serious to wait for a lengthy ratification process. By characterising the war as a breach of the peace, the Security Council could act immediately under Chapter VII of the UN Charter. Part of the international community's motivation in establishing the Tribunal was to prevent further war crimes being committed in the region, particularly against the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croatia.

Gegenstand der vorliegenden Untersuchung ist der Demokratisierungsprozess in Bosnien und Herzegowina (BiH) nach dem Daytoner Abkommen 1995. Die Analyse wird in drei Schritten vorgenommen: Der bislang wenig untersuchte Fall Bosnien und Herzegowina wird anhand von Demokratisierungstheorien erforscht, die vor allem vor dem Hintergrund stabiler Nationalstaaten entwickelt wurden. Durch die Identifikation der wichtigsten Variablen für eine erfolgreiche Demokratisierung wird der Focus auf institutionelle Faktoren gelegt. Schließlich werden die Bemühungen der Europäischen Union im Rahmen ihrer externen Demokratieförderung analysiert. Diese Fragen sind höchst relevant, da sich die Demokratisierungsliteratur kaum mit dem Fall BiH beschäftigt hat und zahlreiche relevante Faktoren vernachlässigt wurden. Die Autorin untersucht die vorhandenen demokratischen Strukturen und Prozesse in Bosnien und Herzegowina anhand des Modells der "consociational democracy" als spezifischem Demokratietypus. Dabei analysiert sie die Anwendbarkeit auf den Fall BiH und die Funktionalität des Modells. Es wird hinterfragt, inwieweit die institutionelle Architektur des Vertrages von Dayton den Demokratisierungsprozess in BiH unterstützt und welchen Einfluss die EU durch die Eröffnung einer Beitrittsperspektive auf diesen Prozess hat. Auf diese Weise setzt die EU Ziele für die politischen Akteuren in BiH und interveniert durch ihre eigenen Institutionen

Discusses compatibility of the Dec. 1995 Accord with the protection of individual human rights and freedoms in a Constitution which defines Bosniacs, Croats, and Serbs as constituent peoples and protects them on the basis of their collective identity.

This article uses a comparative approach to analyze the strengths and limitations of the inclusion of religious actors in peace and transition processes. It compares the theoretical frameworks of Bercovitch and Kadayifci-Orellana, and Brewer, demonstrating how the first helps us understand the strengths of religious actors, while the second sheds more light on their limitations. An analysis of the involvement of religious actors in the peace processes in Northern Ireland and Bosnia and Herzegovina supports the argument that religious actors are more likely to contribute to peace when they are excluded from Track One negotiations and are active in other modalities of participation: in wider social peace processes at national or grass-roots levels. Religious actors can contribute to peace processes especially if they choose to exclude themselves from Track One negotiations in order to avoid the pitfalls of becoming too closely associated with political power.

In 2011 the statistical authorities of Bosnia-Herzegovina collected for the first time a national survey which allows monitoring the European indicators of poverty and social exclusion as well as national indicators of absolute and relative consumption poverty. The Extended Household Budget Survey (EHBS) adds extra modules to a standard Household Budget Surveys (HBS) designed to collect detailed information on household expenditures. The additional modules covered the information needed to measure poverty and social exclusion in EU Member states. In this way, the EHBS represents a hybrid solution between collecting a HBS and a Survey of Income and Living Conditions (SILC), the official tool for measuring poverty and social exclusion in the EU, which omits expenditure information. The note is structured as follows: section two presents a detailed description of the data, while section three discusses the three constituent indicators of AROPE, and their mutual relation, i.e. their union (the AROPE indicator) and their intersection. Section four presents additional dimensions of exclusion on which data have been collected, especially those relating to children. Section five presents a comparison of indicators of monetary poverty and social exclusion. Finally, section six summarizes the most interesting elements which have emerged from this analysis and concludes.

submitted by Merima Abdic ; Literaturverzeichnis: Seite 69-81 ; Masterarbeit Paris-Lodron-Universität Salzburg 2020