Search

After the ruling of the European Court of Human Rights in the case of ‘Sejdic&Finci vs. Bosnia and Herzegovina’, it is evident that election system of Bosnia and Herzegovina is discriminatory and that it is necessary to conduct systematic reform of this area, in order to satisfy the basic principles of contemporary democratic election systems, and in order to make election system, together with the B&H Constitution, compatible with the European Convention On Protection Of Human Rights And Fundamental Freedoms.

This text represents summary version of the final report on research conducted as part of the project of „Monitoring candidates‟ respect of their commitment to ethical behavior during the election campaign.' (or 'Monitoring of pre-election campaign') Research was conducted during period of June 1, 2010 to November 1, 2010 on the entire territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina (B&H). The aims of research titled „Monitoring candidates‟ respect of their commitment to ethical behavior during the election campaign‟ were to conduct monitoring of pre-election rhetoric of 1. key political subjects, 2. most influential media and 3. inside institutions of power and entire public discourse for the first time in B&H.

Bosnia and Herzegovina has been going through an extensive European Union-related reform process for more than a decade, yet the country still faces a serious democratic deficit. In particidar, the post-Dayton public sphere has been dominated by ethno-nationalist political elites which exclude non-nationalists and members of minority groups from the decision-making process. This is a clear paradox, since one of the main objectives of the integration of European countries into the European Community was to reduce disintegrative influences of nationalists, and establish a peaceful, prosperous, and secure community. This essay explores the process of the post-Dayton ethno-nationalization in BiH resulting in widespread discrimination against so-called Others as defined in the Constitution, In the postwar era, BiH democratic participation has tumed into a competition between the three ethnic communities, Bosniaks, Serbs, and Croats, rather than a contest of equal individuals with an equal right to vote. As a result, Bosnian people still live under a political system which is closer to ethno-democracy or ethnocracy rather than a democratic regime. Under such a discriminatory regime, BiH cannot enter the European Union, which is a model of an open, democratic society.

The concept of Europeanization has become very popular in studies of European integration and particularly in analyses on the post-communist countries undergoing extensive transformation on the road to European Union membership. Although the Europeanization process has been quite successful in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe (CEE), the same scenario has not played out in the western Balkans region. With the purpose of analysing the effectiveness and impact of the Europeanization process in the western Balkans, the main subject of the paper is Bosnia and Herzegovina’s EU-related reform processes. Although Bosnia has been undergoing thorough Europeanizing reforms since the late 1990s, when the country entered the Stabilization and Association Process (SAP), it is still an unstable and dysfunctional country. That makes it the perfect case for assessing the possible shortcomings of the Europeanization process. Thus far, most scholars have concluded that domestic political elites in Bosnia are the only party responsible for Bosnia’s political deadlock. However, this paper analyses the continued Bosnian deadlock from a different perspective, trying to figure out the degree of responsibility the European Union shares in the country’s Europeanization process. Although uncooperative Bosnian political elites are to a great extent responsible for the continued political and social status quo, EU leaders are not faultless either. In fact, so far European leaders have often appeared to be deeply divided, incoherent, and short-sighted in terms of Europeanization policies in Bosnia, thus further deepening the political deadlock in the country. Therefore, we can ask whether Bosnia represents a litmus test which the EU has failed.

Following widespread democratization processes in Eastern and Central Europe, in November 1990 the first multi-party elections were held in Bosnia and Herzegovina (hereinafter, Bosnia or BiH). These elections were among the first indicators that marked the democratic transition of the country from the communist regime to liberal democracy. However, political parties in the country were allowed to be organized along ethnic lines resulting in the nationalist parties together collecting 84% of the vote (Arnautovic, 2007: 7). Thus, an organization of the first democratic elections in the country marked the start of the political hegemony of nationalist political parties as the majority of the electorate voted for nationalist parties; that is, Bosniaks voted for Party of Democratic Action (SDA), Bosnian Serbs for Serbian Democratic Party (SDS), and Bosnian Croats for the Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ) (Freedom House, 2010: 122). To illustrate, even the post-election distribution of power was based upon ethnic principles so that the President of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina was a Bosniak, president of the Parliament was a Serb, and the prime minister was a Croat representative. Furthermore, the war that broke out in 1992 further increased ethnic hatred and intolerance, resulting in ethnicity and ethnic solidarity as a dominant social and political cleavage.

There is a wealth of literature and academic writings in which the European Union member states are criticized for not speaking “with a single voice” with regards to its common foreign policies. Similarly, in this paper I analyzed the European Union approach towards Bosnia and Herzegovina in terms of all-embracing Europeanization process of BiH from the angle of the EU's capabilities to affect domestic policy-making process. We came to conclusion that the EU is deeply divided, incoherent, and weak in terms of its Europeanizing policies in Bosnia thus further deepening political impasse in the country. This also proves that to some extent the EU itself is responsible for long-lasting status quo in the country since it is today having a role of international player from which Bosnian ordinary citizens have quite high expectations. This is a serious credibility gap for the EU since it could not assert and prove itself as an attractive and powerful actor that is capable of resolving cumbersome Bosnian enigma.

Bosna Hersek oldukça uzun bir süredir derin politik krizlerle mücadele etmektedir. Beklenen uzlaşmaya ulaşmak ve Bosna Hersek’in Avrupa Birliği yolundaki reformalarını hızlandırmak için gerekli siyasi irade ve kararlılığı göstermedikleri için ülkenin siyasi elitlerinin en büyük sorumluluğa sahip olduğu yaygın bir fikir haline gelmiştir. Her ne kadar iç siyasi elitler ülkenin durgun reform sürecinden büyük oranda sorumlu olsa da, bu çalışmanın amacı, Avrupa Birliği’nin Bosna Hersek’e karşı ne derece sorumlu tutulabileceğinin incelenmesi olmuştur. Bu çerçevede AB’nin Bosna Hersek’in iç politikaları üzerindeki güç ve etkisini ölçmek için Avrupalılaşma perspektifini temel teorik çerçeve olarak kullandım. Her ne kadar Avrupa Birliği savaş sonrası Bosna Hersek’te çok sayıda kurumsal araç geliştirmiş olsa da, yaklaşımı halen bütünlük, bağlılık ve birliğe sahip değildir. Ayrıca, AB üye ülkelerinin bu yaklaşımı Bosnalı politikacıların kendilerinden yüz binlerce farklı biçimde beklenen AB standart ve normlarını anlamalarını sağlamıştır. Bu nedenle, AB, Avrupalılaşma sürecindeki taraflardan biri olarak, Bosna’nın süreğen siyasi çıkmazından büyük ölçüde sorumlu tutulabilir.

During the Cold War the European Community lacking common military instruments was perceived as the example of a civilian power. However, in the early 1990s, under the framework of CFSP, the first concrete defence initiatives have been launched. By the end of the 1990s and after the agreement on the Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP) the first Rapid Reaction Forces were on the European military agenda. Such defence and military capabilities challenged the idea of the EU as a civil or civilian power. Thus, a main concern in the paper has been to assess the character and identity of the EU`s activities in the context of international relations. For this purpose, this study has explored the EU policy instruments such as the enlargement policy, external aid, environmental policy at the global level, multilateralism, and the EU armed forces. The study concludes that the enlargement policy accounts for an important EU strategy to shape the international environment through civilian means. Furthermore, the international aid policy of the EU states has primarily been based on the sense of duty to other countries as constructivists point out. The EU has also been vocal and has used environmental foreign policy as an instrument to demonstrate its global leadership role which is a clear indication of its commitment to global welfare. Thanks to its presence in the major multilateral interventions of the last decade, the EU has qualified itself as great supporter of multilateralism. Lastly, the EU military capabilities are not achieved by creating permanent European armed forces but are still based on the voluntary contributions of its member states. Therefore, the EU still can be portrayed as a global civilian power (GCP) or civilian power Europe (CPE).

Bosna i Hercegovina, kao postkonfliktna i tranzicijska zemlja sa sui generis političkim sistemom niske efikasnosti, vlastite javne politike kreira i sprovodi u specifičnom ambijentu reducirane suverenosti i niskog nivoa odgovornosti ključnih političkih institucija i drugih političkih subjekata. Takav politički ambijent pogoduje proliferaciji nacionalističke, konfliktne i antiustavne retorike i prakse, što svoju kulminaciju doživaljava u periodu predizborne kampanje. Nedovršen zakonodavni izborni okvir, svjesna opstrukcija međunaronodnih izbornih standarda i domaće legislative od strane većine političkih subjekata, visok nivo utjecaja političkih i ekonomskih centara moći na rad medija, nedovoljan broj nezavisnih medija, nerazvijeno civilno društvo, te politizirane i podkapacitirane institucije nadležne za sprovođenje i monitoring izbornog procesa, značajni su razlozi odsustva volje kandidata za ustavnim, zakonskim i etičkim ponašanjem tokom predizborne kampanje. Posljedica navednenog jeste da je predizborna kampanja većine političkih subjekata uglavnom negativistička, ne fokusira se na elementarna pitanja životnog standarda i prioritetne izazove države i društva (poput nužnih ustavnih reformi, euro-atlantskih integracija, strukturalnih ekonomsko-socijalnih reformi, visoke nezaposlenosti, itd.), već na međusobna sukobljavanja, potenciranje krupnih političkih i statusnih pitanja entiteta i konstitutivnih naroda, zatim na partikularnu etno-nacionalističku retoriku, između ostalog negiranjem ustavnih i historijskih činjenica, te na međusobno neutemeljeno diskreditiranje. Krajnji ishod, primarno zahavljujući ulozi masovnih medija, jeste generiranje atmosfere straha i nacionalne homogenizacije, uz istovremeno skrivanje stvarnih ideoloških, političkih, ekonomskih i drugih centara moći, čiji interes i ciljevi perpetuiraju etno-matricu i/ili održavaju status quo.

Confronting an increasing EU opposition from a number of influential member states to its membership the AKP government adopted a multilateral approach to its foreign policy making resulting in dynamic economic and diplomatic policies with the countries from Asia, Africa, Latin America, and the Balkans region. In this article we analyzed the effects and consequences of a paradigmatic shift in Turkish foreign policy in the western Balkans in relation to the country’s EU membership prospects. Through its pro-active economic and diplomatic initiatives in the region Turkey has been proving itself as indispensable country for the European Union membership. Thus, if the Turkish government concentrates more on solving its internal problems and continues its pro-active diplomacy in western Balkans, among other regions, it could become not only a regional but also a global power., Suočivši se sa rastućom opozicijom jednog broja utjecajnih zemalja-članica glede članstva Turske u Europskoj uniji, vladajuća Stranka pravde i razvoja (AKP) usvojila je multilateralni pristup u vanjskoj politici. To je rezultiralo dinamičkom gospodarskom i diplomatskom politikom u odnosu na zemlje Azije, Afrike, Latinske Amerike i balkanske regije. U članku se analiziraju efekti i posljedice paradigmatske promjene u turskoj vanjskoj politici u odnosu na Zapadni Balkan s obzirom na perspektivu članstva Turske u EU. Svojim proaktivnim gospodarskim i diplomatskim inicijativama u regiji Turska se dokazala kao “pogodna” zemlja za članstvo u EU. Stoga, ako se turska vlada u većoj mjeri koncentrira na rješavanje svojih unutarnjih problema i nastavi s proaktivnom diplomacijom na Zapadnom Balkanu i u ostalim regijama, ona može postati ne samo regionalna već i globalna sila.

Questions about the future of the European Union as an international actor continue to puzzle students of international relations and particularly students of EU foreign policy. What kind of predictions can we make about the future role of the EU in international politics? While the question is often framed in terms of military versus normative and/or global civilian power Europe, there are indications that ambitions in both directions may very well coincide. However, despite the EU’s development towards deepened defense integration since the 1990s, such developments are by far outweighed by developments pointing in the direction of the EU consolidating its role as a global civilian power. In this article, we analyze the union’s civilian policies and contrast the findings of our analysis with developments in the field of Common Security and Defence Policy (CSDP). Based on our analysis of EU enlargement policy, external aid, global environmental policy and the union’s commitment to multilateralism, our conclusion is that the EU’s international role in the next decades will continue to be best described in terms of a global civilian power.