Most people in the western world know Bosnia and Herzegovina solely from the devastating war that ripped Yugoslavia apart in the early 90s. As the biggest European conflict since World War Two, it was on the forefront of the international media and the main recipient of international sympathy for a few years. From time to time, a story pops up here and there, like on the annual anniversary of the Srebrenica massacre, where some 8000 Muslim men and boys were killed by the Serbian military. Or when accused war criminal Radovan Karadzic was arrested in Belgrade in 2008, after spending 8 years in hiding, posing as a doctor for alternative medicine.
For the most part, however, we hear nothing. Understandably, fresh crises and tragedies have taken over the headlines and the airtime. It seems only the people who harbour some sort of a connection to the region still attempt to keep updated on the state of the country. The period surrounding a general election, like the one that took place on the 3rd of October, is naturally a good time to get this type of information. I visited Bosnia just a few weeks before the elections, and experienced a country that didn’t seem sure whether to move forwards or stay put.
At first glance, Sarajevo certainly looked pretty much like any western capital preparing to choose its new leaders. All competing parties had apparently spent what one can only imagine to be obscene amounts of money covering the city with campaign materials. Newcomer, Fehruding Radoncic of the Party For A Better Future (media mogul, businessman and all-around Berlusconi wannabe) could be seen smiling down on you from several gigantic roadside billboards. The Social Democratic Party chose a different approach, opting for simple but attention-grabbing bright red posters emblazoned with buzzwordy slogans like “government for the people”. The Bosnian Patriotic party on the other hand, really brought out the big guns, recruiting celebrities like former ballerina Gordana Magas and tennis player Damir Dzumhur to sing their praises.
Downtown, young and enthusiastic people were manning the party stands. I was surprised to hear that most of them didn’t have any connection to the party they were promoting. They were simply being paid to smilingly hand out flyers. To them, it was a way to earn some quick money on the side. In any case, most Sarajevans didn’t seem to be buying what they were selling. They hurried past them, some not even bothering to mouth an apologetic “no thanks” to the offers of pamphlets. And who can blame them, really? The latest figures show that the unemployment rates in the country are at a staggering 43%, with the predicted economic growth for next year at a measly 0.5%. The poverty rate is close to 20%, while retired politicians are raking in more than most people will earn in a lifetime in yearly pension benefits. It’s no wonder mistrust of authority is high, manifesting itself through voter turnout figures usually lingering somewhere around 50% and less. Under conditions like these, it’s also no wonder that some people still chose to vote for nationalistic parties, campaigning mainly on ethnicity.
However, part of the fault also lies with the overly complicated political system imposed through the post-war US brokered Dayton agreement. The central government in Sarajevo is led by three presidents, one representative from each of the three constitutional ethnic groups: Muslims (or Bosniaks), Croats and Serbs. The central government is not particularly strong, and is in many ways subservient to the two smaller, regional entities that the country is split into. Republika Srpska – the Serbian Republic and the Muslim and Croat Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina each have one president. So, on October 3rd, the Bosnian people voted for 5 different presidents and some 700 MPs. In addition to being unnecessarily bureaucratic for a country still riddled with political corruption, it highlights a very important issue. Can a country with an already complicated ethnic history ever be truly united, if people are constantly reminded of their differences and past divisions through the very nature of their presidency? “It’s insanity really,” a pensioner I met by the SDP party stand told me. “We’re the only nation in the world with a three member collective presidency.” A recent report by the International Crisis report think tank echoes these sentiments. “A dysfunctional administrative system has paralysed decision-making, put the entity on the verge of bankruptcy and triggered social unrest.”
Despite this, the elections went on as planned, though not without some road bumps. In the weeks leading up to the elections, two of the biggest television stations were accused of biased reporting. There has also been accusation of fraud, as 13% of the ballots for the Serbian presidency were found to be invalid. The election commission will be looking into the incident. On a more positive note, with 55%, 2010 can boast the highest voter turnout in 8 years.
As for the actual results, they present an ambiguous picture. On the one hand, both the Muslim and Croat presidency seats were won by relatively moderate candidates, campaigning on the platform of a united Bosnia. Bakir Izetbegovic, the son of wartime president Alija Izetbegovic, is the new Muslim president, ousting nationalist Haris Siljadzic. Incumbent Zejlko Komzic of the Social Democratic Party gets to keep his job for another 4 years, with the multiethnic party also winning the majority of the seats in the parliament of the Federation. This would suggest that people are in fact ready for change, and ready to start on the journey of putting the past behind them. “We are at a crossroads. Either we start to rise, or we will slide down,” Mr. Izetbegovic proclaimed after the voting closed on Sunday.
On the flipside, the results of the Serbian votes point to a somewhat different conclusion. Nebojsa Radmanovic of the Alliance of Independent Social Democrats won the presidency and the party also won the regional election the Republic. The Alliance has made no secret of its nationalist inclination, with leader Milorad Dodik several times threatening the secession of the Republic. “If the pressure on the Serb Republic becomes too great, we will calmly and slowly build our position to one day decide our fate on our own,” he told the Belgrade based paper Politika. Interestingly, the runner-up for the presidency was Mladen Ivanic, a moderate who wants to work closer with Muslims and Croats. If anything, this shows a country still deeply divided, and still unsure of the road ahead.
In Sarajevo’s main street, Bašaršija, located in the old town, I met a young shopkeeper, speaking perfect English. She told me she learnt it from watching Monty Python growing up. Raised in relatively well off Slovenia, she moved to Sarajevo just a few years ago. When I asked her why, she simply said, “I just had to. I came back on a ten-day holiday but unexpectedly fell in love with the city. I called my mother and said ‘mum, I’m not coming back. This is my home now.’ People said I was crazy, but what can you do? This is where I belong.”
So, despite persistent ethnic tensions and a complex political system that has outsiders and natives alike scratching their heads, the people of Sarajevo seem proud. The crowded streets on the way into the city centre with flags waving in the air in preparation for Euro qualifier match against France suggest as much. Whatever lies in the future of this small but complicated nation, its citizens continue to push on and hope for a better tomorrow. After all, what else can they do?