Peace in Bosnia

Events in Bosnia-Herzegovina continue to be driven by international pressure in an effort to create a dynamic of reconciliation…

Events in Bosnia-Herzegovina continue to be driven by international pressure in an effort to create a dynamic of reconciliation to replace that of war. The latest conflicts in the Republika Srpska bear this out. Sfor, the Nato-led stabilisation force, has become deeply engaged on the side of the Bosnian Serb president, Ms Biljana Plavsic, in her struggle against Mr Radovan Karadzic for control of the territory. Although an equally hard line Serb nationalist, she has been frustrated in her efforts to assert her authority by his continued resistance and the network of corruption which has enriched him and his group of supporters in the former ski resort of Pale. Senior US, Nato and EU figures have taken the view that Ms Plavsic must be supported in order to open up politics among the Bosnian Serbs. They have sought - unsuccessfully so far - to convince the Serbian leader, Mr Slobodan Milosevic, that he must come to her aid. She has called municipal elections for this weekend and parliamentary ones for next month to test opinion and has been willing to rely on international support to see her authority upheld. Following Sfor's intervention last month to replace pro-Karadzic police forces in Banja Luka, its troops have been attacked by crowds there and in Brcko. Ms Plavsic insists they were bussed in to heighten the temperature in order that the elections could be postponed or cancelled. Otherwise they may be boycotted by Karadzic's supporters in a rerun of the tactics which originally led to the Bosnian war.

The calculation is that it is better to support Ms Plavsic despite her opposition to an integrated Bosnia-Herzegovina, because her victory over Mr Karadzic would indebt her to the international community and make it easier to arrest Karadzic to face war-crimes charges at the International Tribunal in The Hague. The policy bears all the hallmarks of the Dayton process which brought this uncertain peace to Bosnia-Herzegovina; and within those parameters it is hard to quarrel with its cogency. If Dayton is the only game in town - and who disputes that? - it is essential that political progress be seen to be made within the three main Bosnian communities and in the surrounding states that sustain them. The further calculation is that from a combination of such pressures there could arise a more general dynamic towards political accommodation and reconciliation. This would allow further prosecution of war-crimes charges and, most important, facilitate the return of refugees.

Such international pressure is therefore welcome; the pity is that so little progress can be made without it. But, despite the impressively large-scale commitment involved in Sfor and its great success in the military and security spheres, the urgency of making political progress has frequently receded from international attention over the last year. Concerted pressure on the parties seems to await deadlines rather than anticipate them. There has been far too much indecision about whether, and how, to arrest war-crimes suspects. But the rest of the world cannot take Sfor's valuable work for granted. It is important that political and media attention continue to be devoted to it if there is not to be a reversion to the barbaric acts of the war.