Tuesday, March 17, 2009

Why was Sarajevo the Jerusalem of Europe?

Why did it work? Why did Christians, Jews and Muslims live there peacefully for such a long time?

Nobody in my class answered my question. (Top: Srebrenica massacre commemoration in Sarajevo - summer 2007.)

Let me put this into context: we are talking about conditionality, EU accession as an incentive for "Western Balkans" to reform their justice systems and to bring war criminals to justice and models of democratization. Which models of democratization should be adopted in the region?



I ask: how about asking the people there what they think about democratization? What is democracy to them? I say: democratize through democracy. My professor says that the man on the street doesn't know. You should ask experts.

I think this is a top-down approach (which I resent). I argue the Canadian model: if you want to bring democracy to a multicultural region, why don't you look at societies where multiculturalism works? Canada is the home of multiculturalism (thanks PE Trudeau).

This is where I asked: why did Sarajevo work?

Another point I made earlier: the EU must regain trust without conditionality in the region. Not getting rid of conditionality entirely (because the EU would lose its values - one classmate rightly pointed out). You have to win people's heart. People in the region (and this stems for more than 50 interviews I've done two years ago) - feel betrayed. Where was the EU when Sarajevo was under siege for four years?


The movies No Man's Land, Welcome to Sarajevo and the Hunting Party represent this feeling of betrayal well.

I don't think you can build democracy without asking the locals how they think it should be done. I have a hunch the EU is slightly guilty of this (moral and political) offense.

More from the author:
Learning Kosovo
From a No Man's Land to Fragile Peace: Building Democracy in the Balkans

4 comments:

Anonymous said...

Interesting. What do you think about pre-war Poland? I mean, it was a very welcoming place for different cultures as well. For some reason, living now in Warsaw, I believe it is happening again. Would love to hear what you think. Take care!

Kinia said...

Thanks for the comment!

I think a multicultural Poland was a richer Poland. I'm not entirely satisfied with the concept of the nation-state... Yes, Poland was a very welcoming place for different cultures in its earlier history and I feel like this is slowly trickling back into people's consciousness here.

You may be interested in cosmopolitanreview.com.

It's all about modern Poland, Poles and the world, from an international perspective.

Eleytheria said...

Did it really work? Does Jerusalem really work? Does Canada? Does Belgium? Does Switzerland? - I am not so sure. Don't get me wrong, I am not arguing against multiethnic societies, I am just questioning if they really work(ed) so far.

I honestly don't believe it worked that well in Sarajevo. If you look at reports and testimonies or even literature (take Ivo Andric for instance) you see that life was never just harmonious. Communism helped to keep the lid on nationalist pressures and ressentments that errupted once the lid (or Tito) was gone.

Nationalism didn't develop over night, I fear. Before the socialist Yugoslavia there was the kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes (Bosnians not even being mentioned) and before that the Ottoman empire, with both its shortcomings and achievements.

The real question to ask is maybe when did the (Western) idea of nationalism arrive in the region. Starting to usee "ethnicity" as a denominator was a crucial turning point in Balkan history.

Coming back to the Western multiethnic or multicultural states, I wittnessed an interesting discussion among diplomates from former Yugoslav states. The Serbian ambassador reported from a meeting with his Belgian counterpart. "How do you manage to stick together in one country?" he asked. "We are rich!" was the short answer...

Eleytheria said...

oh... and commenting on the comments on multicultural pre-war Poland: Again, was it really? What about Pilsudski's hardcore nationalism? What about his Sanacja regime? What about the strong Polish movements during the Polish division? What about antisemitism in pre-war (and post-war) Poland?

Again I think that our dream of a peaceful multicultural state is blurring the facts. I totally agree that multicultural states are 'richer' and many of our problems stem from nationalist/patriotic perspectives. To really achieve the aim of living together though, we should also face past shortcomings to avoid them in the future.