Post by Novus Dis on Jul 28, 2008 23:25:41 GMT -5
Don't hold Bosnia together artificially.
Daniel Hannan
Paddy Ashdown is alarmed that Bosnia might divide along ethnic lines. If the Republika Srpska were to declare independence, he frets, ethnic Croats might follow suit, leaving a "rump" Bosniak state.
Yes, my Lord. And your problem with that is...?
Ashdown trots out all the usual clichés about Balkan tragedies, and reminds us of the horrors that the South Slav peoples visited upon each other in the 1990s. But those horrors were at least as much the consequence of denying the national principle as of granting it. First, the EU tried to insist on "the integrity of Yugoslavia", warning the constituent republics that, if they were so foolish as to secede, they would be cold-shouldered by Brussels. Who can forget Jacques Poos of Luxembourg telling the Slovenes that their country was too small to be an independent state?
Then, when the break-up of Yugoslavia became irreversible, the EU determined to apply the same principle to Bosnia-Herzegovina, insisting that a multi-ethnic state be preserved whether its inhabitants wanted it or not.
Quite apart from being undemocratic, the international community was being inconsistent. If non-Serbs had the right to leave Yugoslavia, surely Bosnian Serbs had the right to leave Bosnia (or, if you prefer, stay in Yugoslavia). Had there been a partition along ethnic lines at the outset, there would doubtless have been difficulties, population exchanges, even violence. But it is hard to see how things could have been anything like as bad as what in fact happened.
Paddy Ashdown is of course entitled to take the view that Bosnia should be a unitary entity. Cleverer and more knowledgeable writers, notably Noel Malcolm, have taken a similar line. Ultimately, though - as with Kosovo, as with Belgium - the question should be settled by the people who actually live in the territories concerned. If they feel a common sense of identity as Bosnians, good luck to them. If the Serbs wish to be independent or to join Serbia, that is their business. If the Muslims and the Croats wish to dissolve their own federation, or if the Bosnian Croats want to confederate with Croatia proper, or if... oh, you get the picture. The point is, it should be up to them, not to Lord Ashdown or me. If you don't like the phrase "ethnographic frontiers", try "democratic frontiers": it amounts to the same thing.
Daniel is a Daily Telegraph leader writer and Conservative MEP for South East England. He has written seven publications on the EU, and was the first person in Britain to campaign for a referendum on the European Constitution. He contributes regularly to a number of Continental newspapers, and speaks French and Spanish.
Daniel Hannan
Paddy Ashdown is alarmed that Bosnia might divide along ethnic lines. If the Republika Srpska were to declare independence, he frets, ethnic Croats might follow suit, leaving a "rump" Bosniak state.
Yes, my Lord. And your problem with that is...?
Ashdown trots out all the usual clichés about Balkan tragedies, and reminds us of the horrors that the South Slav peoples visited upon each other in the 1990s. But those horrors were at least as much the consequence of denying the national principle as of granting it. First, the EU tried to insist on "the integrity of Yugoslavia", warning the constituent republics that, if they were so foolish as to secede, they would be cold-shouldered by Brussels. Who can forget Jacques Poos of Luxembourg telling the Slovenes that their country was too small to be an independent state?
Then, when the break-up of Yugoslavia became irreversible, the EU determined to apply the same principle to Bosnia-Herzegovina, insisting that a multi-ethnic state be preserved whether its inhabitants wanted it or not.
Quite apart from being undemocratic, the international community was being inconsistent. If non-Serbs had the right to leave Yugoslavia, surely Bosnian Serbs had the right to leave Bosnia (or, if you prefer, stay in Yugoslavia). Had there been a partition along ethnic lines at the outset, there would doubtless have been difficulties, population exchanges, even violence. But it is hard to see how things could have been anything like as bad as what in fact happened.
Paddy Ashdown is of course entitled to take the view that Bosnia should be a unitary entity. Cleverer and more knowledgeable writers, notably Noel Malcolm, have taken a similar line. Ultimately, though - as with Kosovo, as with Belgium - the question should be settled by the people who actually live in the territories concerned. If they feel a common sense of identity as Bosnians, good luck to them. If the Serbs wish to be independent or to join Serbia, that is their business. If the Muslims and the Croats wish to dissolve their own federation, or if the Bosnian Croats want to confederate with Croatia proper, or if... oh, you get the picture. The point is, it should be up to them, not to Lord Ashdown or me. If you don't like the phrase "ethnographic frontiers", try "democratic frontiers": it amounts to the same thing.
Daniel is a Daily Telegraph leader writer and Conservative MEP for South East England. He has written seven publications on the EU, and was the first person in Britain to campaign for a referendum on the European Constitution. He contributes regularly to a number of Continental newspapers, and speaks French and Spanish.