|
Archived Articles
Simeon Mitropolitski is a Canadian analyst, of Bulgarian origin, and a former syndicated columnist with the Bulgarian News Agency (BTA). He is the author of several hundred articles dealing with hot political and economic topics, both national and international.
He was part of the first group of Bulgarian intellectuals and students that began the opposition movement that finally put an end to the communist regime in this country in 1989, and in 1996-1997 participated in international observation teams during the elections in several Balkan countries - Romania, Albania and Bulgaria.
In 2002 Simeon and his family moved from Bulgaria to Canada where they live now in Montreal, province of Quebec. Simeon is a Master of Political Science from McGill University and a B.A. of Political Science and History.
Global Real Estate Project
|
 |
Bosnia and Herzegovina: 10 years later
More than 10 years after the war was officially over in Bosnia and Herzegovina what this country looks like? Is it on right track, or on the brink of state collapse along ethnic lines? What kind of leverages the world has to prevent the latter from happening? Is it worth living in Bosnia in time of peace? Can the scars of war be healed at all for those who've gone through it? As a young international newspaper journalist I did witness the beginning of the war in former Yugoslavia and the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, in particular. It was a war of ethnic extermination. It was very consistent with the earlier bloody history of the Balkans at the time when the Ottoman Empire collapsed. It came as a complete surprise for the West Europeans for whom such atrocities existed only in the history textbooks describing medieval religious wars. Within three years half of the local population has left their homes, more than 200,000 were dead; many more were barely surviving biologically. The peace that came after wasn't a lesser surprise than the war it came to replace. At the beginning few believed it could hold at all. Up until now many, myself including, don't believe it would create stable and democratic federation. More or less stable European protectorate, yes; multiethnic democratic federation within the Balkans, never. Yet this is precisely what the European Union (EU) is keen to accomplish, Bosnia and Herzegovina as a multiethnic democratic federation. So far it's more multiethnic than democratic, but Brussels has a big carrot in the pocket, the pass for the 'club of rich', the EU. If different ethnic groups in the federation behave well, meaning they don't destroy the country, apply many norms in different fields, and especially never put into question the leading role of the Union as teacher of democracy, then they may expect in reasonable future, maybe within 10-15 years, to join the Union. EU is very serious about this. Since 2005 EU and Bosnia negotiate a Stabilization and Association Agreement, first step toward declaring the country official candidate for membership with eventual start of accession negotiations. Stabilization and Association process officially exists since 1999. At that time it was a powerful tool of the West against local dictatorial regimes like the regime of Slobodan Milosevic. The idea was to make the former Yugoslav republics and Albania embracing peace, political democracy, rule of law, and interethnic tolerance in exchange for a firm commitment for future membership in EU. With Milosevic still in power this idea looked detached from reality in 1999, but only a year later when his regime was toppled the EU had to keep its promise and support its commitment with real deeds. In fact, what we see now in Bosnia is a sort of compromise between two irreconcilable realities, democracy and multi-ethnicity in the Balkan context. The EU desperately wants to prove they may coexist. The constant proofs for the opposite make the EU postponing the process of Bosnian Euro-integration. Postponing this process beyond all reasonable limits however may send a wrong signal that the federation should be split in order to accelerate each part's separate integration into the EU. Brussels tries to avoid this and therefore is required to provide additional proofs for its commitment regardless of any democratic achievement; thus making any further democratization look like pure illusion. What the EU really did was to encapsulate three ethnic regimes, Serb, Croat, and Bosnian-Muslim, by creating an allure of multiethnic democracy 'in transition', in fact in stagnation in the name of the regional peace. Up to 180,000 internally displaced persons, not counting international refugees, are still without homes, and it seems they have lost any hope that this situation may change. Despite the change in names, SFOR, EUROFOR, Bosnia is still a western security protectorate. The main war criminals are still hiding, requiring close cooperation from the local population, which shows its real attitude toward NATO- and EU-imposed 'multiethnic democracy'. What the consequences may be? In the Balkan context the most logical solution will be to divide Bosnia between its neighbors Serbia and Croatia leaving a smaller state with predominant Muslim population. This idea of having Muslim state in Europe shouldn't be taken as a shock; Albania is also a state with predominant Muslim population. Kosovo may be the next. The EU may continue urging for multiethnic democratic federation showing the big carrot of EU membership. This may help keeping the federation together for some time, but it won't advance the cause of democracy and of rule of law. This is dead-end approach that sooner or later will have to be reconsidered.
Bosnia and Herzegovina profile:
|
See also:
