Oct 4th 2010, 15:36 by T.J.
IN THE the run-up to yesterday’s elections in Bosnia, analysts generally agreed on two things. First, that there was widespread apathy amongst the country’s 3.1m registered voters. Second, that the results of the vote would mean nothing would change. Today, things look rather different. Turnout was expected to be around 56%, higher than in the last set of elections, four years ago. And in a big upset, Haris Silajdžić, the outgoing Bosniak (Bosnian Muslim) representative on the country’s three-man presidency, who was widely expected to win re-election, was trounced by Bakir Izetbegović, son of Alija Izetbegović, Bosnia’s wartime president.
Four years ago Mr Silajdžić campaigned on a platform of abolishing Bosnia’s two post-war entities, the Bosniak-Croat federation and the Serb-dominated Republika Srpska (RS, see map). Not only was he unable to achieve this, his rhetoric helped contribute to the popularity among Serbs of Milorad Dodik, the RS leader, who now talks openly of secession.
Mr Izetbegović is not popular with everyone, but he campaigned on a policy of compromise with the RS as well as Bosnia’s Croats, many of whom would like to see a so-called third entity, a Croat-only element within Bosnia. In 2009 Mr Izetbegović was defeated by Sulejman Tihić in the race to head their party. It remains to be seen how the pair will work together in the wake of the unexpected election result.
The official turnout figure is probably an underestimate, as large numbers of those on the electoral roll live abroad. Nationalists—those who vote along ethnic lines—tend to be more disciplined about voting, so the high turnout figure suggests that anti-nationalists voted in higher numbers than expected. The Social Democratic Party, which appeals across the ethnic divide, looked set to have the largest number of seats in the parliament of the Bosniak-Croat federation, and its candidate retained the Croat seat on the country's presidency, which means large numbers of Bosniaks must have voted for him.
Nebojša Radmanović, who is from Mr Dodik's party, was re-elected as the Serb representative on the country's presidency. But the real surprise here was the success of Mladen Ivanić, whose party is more open to finding workable solutions within Bosnia than Mr Radmanović's. However, with 13% of ballots in the RS ruled void, an investigation into possible fraud will take place.
Mr Dodik, the outgoing RS prime minister, looked certain to be elected as its president. Just before the poll he gave the Wall Street Journal a clear idea of how he sees the future, including his opinion that in 15 years time the state of Bosnia-Hercegovina will no longer exist.
Next month marks the 15th anniversary of the end of the Bosnian war. In the early postwar years the country stagnated. Then came a period of optimism and reform. But in the past four years the country has fallen back. Mr Silajdžić torpedoed a modest package of constitutional reforms in 2006 and since then Mr Dodik has taken ever-tougher positions on preserving the RS’s autonomous prerogatives. This has meant blocking almost all moves to make Bosnia a more functional state.
But Bosnia's problems run deeper than the federal level. A new report from the International Crisis Group focuses on the Bosniak-Croat federation, describing it thus:
a dense bureaucracy, whose various parts function in competition or open conflict with one another, and a suffocating thicket of confusing and often contradictory legislation and regulation. Federation administrative bloat and disorder make Bosnia’s larger entity one of Europe’s worst places to do business and choke its people’s economic potential.
The federation, argues the report, is virtually bankrupt, saddled with large pensions for politically powerful war veterans. An attempt to rein in those payments met with violent protests last April, yet the ICG cites a federation official as saying that 50% to 70% of veterans receive benefits illegally. Also, big companies, “largely or entirely owned by the federation”, are a major prize for politicians. They:
finance political parties and elites, especially through subcontractor contracts for politicians’ friends or family members. Dividing control over the most lucrative companies, especially in the energy and telecom sectors, has been a key part of the post-election coalition-making process for a decade. Party leaders appoint boards of directors, which then name the chief executive.
Commitment to a multiethnic BiH [Bosnia-Hercegovina] is today at best grudging among most Serbs and RS, whose policies make the country all but ungovernable. Further deterioration and continued political infighting may inflict irreparable damage to the fragile ethnic relations and so put the state’s viability in question. Only by endorsing compromise politics, offering full protection to Croats, ignoring RS provocations and accepting the reality that the country’s future is as a decentralised state can Bosnia’s leaders revitalise first the Federation and then Bosnia itself.
Not everyone agrees. One diplomat scoffs that the real problem is the RS leadership, under Mr Dodik. The ICG’s argument that Bosnia could split unless the federation is reformed is akin to saying “that a dysfunctional government in Hertfordshire will cause the UK to fall apart.”
It may now take weeks or even months to form new governments at the state level, in the
federation and in the RS. In the meantime Bosnians, who are famously gloomy, are unified in their hope for a piece of good news. The EU looks set to admit Bosnia (and Albania) to its 25 member visa-free Schengen zone. The rumour, however, is that France may be prepared to scupper the deal. If anyone in Europe deserves a break, it is the long-suffering Bosnians. Give it to them.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/easternapproaches/2010/10/bosnias_election
the economist, eastern approaches
the economist, eastern approaches
Δεν υπάρχουν σχόλια:
Δημοσίευση σχολίου