Navigating Consociationalism's Afterlives: Women, Peace and Security in Post-Dayton Bosnia-Herzegovina

Abstract

This article revisits the gendered implications of the Dayton peace settlement in Bosnia-Herzegovina and assesses possibilities for the meaningful integration of the Women, Peace and Security agenda into the consociational structures and post-conflict political agenda. This article outlines how the reification and legitimization of ethno-nationalist power over two decades of Dayton has restricted the terrain for gender activism. A critical assessment of post-Dayton governance reveals an unanticipated stratification of the agreement. International pressure for the stability of the peace settlement further constrains the complex task of addressing the gendered legacies of conflict and conflict transformation. In this context, local and international efforts to navigate Dayton's afterlives through gender activism act as a powerful reminder that Bosnia-Herzegovina's unfulfilled peace must remain a priority in research, activist and policymaking agendas.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I wish to thank Siobhan Byrne, Allison McCulloch, Danielle Roberts and the two anonymous reviewers for insightful comments and productive suggestions. I would also like to thank Ken McDonagh, the Institute for International Conflict Resolution and Reconstruction and the School of Law and Government at Dublin City University for hosting my fellowship and fostering this piece of research. I am indebted to all the research participants who contributed in important ways to developing this piece. Any mistakes I have made are my own.

FUNDING

The author acknowledges the funding support of the Irish Research Council New Horizons Starter Grant Scheme.

Notes

1. The literature on the topic is extensive. See, for example, Carol Cohn, Helen Kinsella, and Sheri Gibbings, “Women, Peace and Security Resolution 1325,” International Feminist Journal of Politics 6, no. 1 (2004): 130–140; Torunn L. Tryggestad, “Trick or Treat? The UN and Implementation of Security Council Resolution 1325 on Women, Peace, and Security,” Global Governance: A Review of Multilateralism and International Organizations 15, no. 4 (2009): 539–557; Nicola Pratt and Sophie Richter-Devroe, “Critically Examining UNSCR 1325 on Women, Peace and Security,” International Feminist Journal of Politics 13, no. 4 (2011): 489–503; Henri Myrttinen, Jana Naujoks, and Judy El-Bushra, Re-Thinking Gender in Peacebuilding (International Alert London, 2014); Laura McLeod, “Configurations of Post-Conflict: Impacts of Representations of Conflict and Post-Conflict upon the (Political) Translations of Gender Security within UNSCR 1325,” International Feminist Journal of Politics 13, no. 4 (2011): 594–611; Vanessa Farr, “UNSCR 1325 and Women's Peace Activism in the Occupied Palestinian Territory,” International Feminist Journal of Politics 13, no. 4 (2011): 539–56; Melanie Hoewer, “UN Resolution 1325 in Ireland: Limitations and Opportunities of the International Framework on Women, Peace and Security,” Irish Political Studies 28, no. 3 (2013): 450–468.

2. Ronan Kennedy, Claire Pierson, and Jennifer Thomson, “Challenging Identity Hierarchies: Gender and Consociational Power-Sharing,” British Journal of Politics and International Relations 18, no. 3 (2016): 618–633; Christine Bell, Unsettling Bargains?: Power-Sharing and the Inclusion of Women in Peace Negotiations (New York: UN Women, 2015); Kris Brown and Fionnuala Ní Aoláin, “Through the Looking Glass: Transitional Justice Futures through the Lens of Nationalism, Feminism and Transformative Change,” International Journal of Transitional Justice 9, no. 1 (2014): 127–149; Bernadette C. Hayes and Ian McAllister, “Gender and Consociational Power-Sharing in Northern Ireland,” International Political Science Review 34, no. 2 (2013): 123–139; Siobhan Byrne and Allison McCulloch, “Gender, Representation and Power-Sharing in Post-Conflict Institutions,” International Peacekeeping 19, no. 5 (2012): 565–80; Miki Caul Kittilson and Leslie Schwindt-Bayer, “Engaging Citizens: The Role of Power-Sharing Institutions,” Journal of Politics 72, no. 4 (2010): 990–1002; Sumie Nakaya, “Women and Gender Equality in Peace Processes: From Women at the Negotiating Table to Postwar Structural Reforms in Guatemala and Somalia,” Global Governance 9, no. 4 (2003): 459–476.

3. Bell, Unsettling Bargains?

4. Byrne and McCulloch, “Gender, Representation and Power-Sharing.”

5. Bell, “Unsettling Bargains?,” 6.

6. The term “gender machineries” usually indicates governmental structures assigned to promote gender equality. In the context of BiH these are the Agency for Gender Equality of Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Gender Centres of the BiH Federation and Republika Srpska. I also conducted interviews with representatives of the EU delegation in BiH and UN Women, as these agencies contribute to the promotion of gender equality in BiH.

7. I am currently working on a monograph emerging from the project titled Gender and Citizenship: Promises of Peace in Post-Dayton Bosnia-Herzegovina that analyzes interview data and cultural products, installations and media clipping (forthcoming 2018).

8. I gathered this information while working on the research project “Add Women and Hope? Assessing the Gender Impact of EU CSDP missions.” Led by Dr Kenneth McDonagh, the project is funded by the Irish Research Council New Horizons Starter Grant Scheme #loveirishresearch.

9. Kvinna till Kvinna, “Engendering the Peace Process,” (2000), http://kvinnatillkvinna.se/en/publication/2013/04/18/engendering-the-peace-process-2000/ (accessed 15 December 2016).

10. Christine Chinkin and Kate Paradine, “Vision and Reality: Democracy and Citizenship of Women in the Dayton Peace Accords,” Yale Journal of International Law 26 (2001): 103.

11. The Law on Gender Equality has been amended in 2009 and consolidated in 2010. The second iteration of the Gender Action Plan 2013–2017 is now active.

12. Ankica Tomić, “Gender Mainstreaming of the Security Sector in Bosnia and Herzegovina: From the Policy Papers to Reality,” Connections: The Quarterly Journal 14, no. 3 (2015): 87–102.

13. National Action Plan for the Implementation of 1325 available at http://www.peacewomen.org/assets/file/bosniaherzegovina_nationalactionplan_2010.pdf (accessed 27 March 2014).

14. See “Action Plan for Implementation of UNSCR 1325 in Bosnia and Herzegovina for the Period 2014–2017” https://www.inclusivesecurity.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/12/BiH-NAP-ENG.pdf (accessed 16 November 2016).

15. Tomić, “Gender Mainstreaming of the Security Sector.”

16. Nicole George and Laura J. Shepherd, “Women, Peace and Security: Exploring the Implementation and Integration of UNSCR 1325,” International Political Science Review 37, no. 3 (2016): 297–306; Paul Kirby and Laura J. Shepherd, “The Futures Past of the Women, Peace and Security Agenda,” International Affairs 92, no. 2 (2016): 373–392.

17. Radhika Coomaraswamy, Preventing Conflict Transforming Justice Securing Peace. A Global Study on the Implementation of United Nations Security Council Resolution 1325, 2015, http://wps.unwomen.org/en/highlights/global-study-release (accessed 20 December 2017); George and Shepherd, ‘Women, Peace and Security’.

18. Allison McCulloch, “Consociational Settlements in Deeply Divided Societies: The Liberal-Corporate Distinction,” Democratization 21, no. 3 (2014): 501–518; Byrne and McCulloch, “Gender, Representation and Power-Sharing.”

19. The international oversight mechanisms, envisioned to mitigate conflict and prevent abuse of power, perversely offered the nationalist elites opportunities to strategically engage in divisive politics in the knowledge that consequences would be averted through external intervention. In later years, as Eric Gordy notes, the well-known argument that Dayton was internationally sponsored and lacked local ownership, precisely because of international oversight, has become an alibi for the elites when calls for political change of any sort are made. See Eric Gordy, “Dayton's Annex 4 Constitution at 20: Political Stalemate, Public Dissatisfaction and the Rebirth of Self-Organisation,” Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 15, no. 4 (2015): 611–22; Adis Merdzanovic, ‘“Imposed Consociationalism’: External Intervention and Power Sharing in Bosnia and Herzegovina,” Peacebuilding 5, no. 1 (2017): 22–35.

20. Gordy, “Dayton's Annex 4 Constitution at 20”; Andrew Gilbert and Jasmin Mujanović,“Dayton at Twenty: Towards New Politics in Bosnia-Herzegovina,” Southeast European and Black Sea Studies, 2016, 1–6.

21. “Open Letter to the International Community,” WomenOrganizingForChange, http://womenorganizingforchange.org/en/statements/open-letter-to-the-international-community/ (accessed 15 December 2016).

22. Gordy, “Dayton's Annex 4 Constitution at 20.”

23. Timothy A. Donais, “Dayton +20: Peacebuilding and the Perils of Exclusivity,” Peacebuilding 5, no. 1 (2017): 7–21.

24. See Inter-Parliamentary Union-Women in National Parliament http://archive.ipu.org/wmn-e/classif.htm(accessed 16 November 2016); Arijana Aganovic, Edita Miftari, and Marina Veličković, ‘1995–2015: Women and Political Life in Post-Dayton Bosnia and Herzegovina’, 2015: 66, http://soc.ba/site/wp-content/uploads/2016/02/1995-2015-eng_za-web.pdf (accessed 20 December 2017).

25. See “Action plan for implementation of UNSCR 1325 2014–2017.”

26. “Lokalni Izbori u BiH: Od 417 Kandidata Za Načelnike Općina Samo Je 26 Žena.” Klix.Ba, https://www.klix.ba/vijesti/bih/lokalni-izbori-u-bih-od-417-kandidata-za-nacelnike-opcina-samo-je-26-zena/160926023 (accessed 15 December 2016).

27. Elissa Helms, Innocence and Victimhood: Gender, Nation, and Women's Activism in Postwar Bosnia-Herzegovina (Madison: University of Wisconsin Pres, 2013).

28. Ibid.

29. Ibid.

30. Aganovic, Miftari, and Veličković, “1995–2015: Women and Political Life in Post-Dayton Bosnia.”

31. This view was expressed by many of the interviewees who explicitly identify as feminist.

32. The dissatisfaction with the primacy of nationalist politics was shared by the majority of interviewees I encountered throughout my successive field trips.

33. SNSD started as a moderate party but it is now classified as a nationalist formation representing Serb interests. Party leader Milorad Dodik has often threatened the secession of Republika Srpska. See Catherine Baker, The Yugoslav Wars of the 1990s (New York: Palgrave, 2015).

34. Personal interview with Dusanka Majikic, incumbent Deputy Speaker for the BiH House of the People, member of SNSD party, Sarajevo 1 April 2010.

35. Personal interview with Lejla Somun-Krupalija, Sarajevo 19 April 2010.

36. “Is Bosnia the Worst Place in Europe to Be a Woman?” OpenDemocracy, https://www.opendemocracy.net/can-europe-make-it/tea-hadziristic/women-in-bosnia (accessed 6 December 2016); Adriana Zaharijević, “Dissidents, Disloyal Citizens and Partisans of Emancipation: Feminist Citizenship in Yugoslavia and Post-Yugoslav Spaces,” Women's Studies International Forum 49 (2015): 93–100.

37. Personal Interview with Duška Jurišić Sarajevo, 9 September 2010. The media campaign unfolded in the pages of a popular local newspaper incidentally owned by the leader of (Bosniak) nationalist-oriented and populist Party for Better Future (SBB). It revolved around allegations that mobilised the journalist's Serbian ethnicity and her gender to discredit her suitability for holding a post of national(ist) interest such as Federation TV.

38. Oslobodjenje.ba, “BiH Journalists' Association Sharply Condemns RS President's Verbal Attack on Oslobodjenje Reporter Gordana Katana,” Oslobođenje | Bosanskohercegovačke Nezavisne Novine, http://www.oslobodjenje.ba/daily-news/bih-journalists-association-sharply-condemns-rs-presidents-verbal-attack-on-oslobodjenje-reporter-gordana-katana (accessed 14 March 2016).

39. Confidential interview, Sarajevo, 26 August 2015.

40. “Bosnia Verdict Shows the Tide Is Turning for Leaders Who Use Mass Rape as a Weapon of War,” International Business Times UK, 29 March 2016, http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/mass-rape-weapon-war-bosnia-verdict-warning-leaders-who-unbolt-heart-darkness-1551989 (accessed 20 December 2017); Julian Borger Diplomatic editor, “Bosnia Rape Victims May Claim Compensation for First Time,” The Guardian, 30 June 2015, https://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/30/bosnia-victims-compensation-landmark-ruling (accessed 20 December 2017).

41. Gorana Mlinarević, Nela Porobić Isaković, and Madeleine Rees, “If Women Are Left out of Peace Talks,” Forced Migration Review 2015, http://www.fmreview.org/mlinarevic-isakovic-rees.html (accessed 20 December 2017).

42. Maria O'Reilly, “Peace and Justice through a Feminist Lens: Gender Justice and the Women's Court for the Former Yugoslavia,” Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding 10, no. 3 (2016): 425.

43. Helms, Innocence and Victimhood; Brown and Ní Aoláin, “Through the Looking Glass.”

44. Daniela Lai, “Transitional Justice and Its Discontents: Socioeconomic Justice in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Limits of International Intervention,” Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding 10, no. 3 (2016): 361–81; Cera Murtagh, “Civic Mobilization in Divided Societies and the Perils of Political Engagement: Bosnia and Herzegovina's Protest and Plenum Movement,” Nationalism and Ethnic Politics 22, no. 2 (2016): 149–171.

45. Confidential personal interview Sarajevo 24 August 2015.

46. The Plenums are citizens' assemblies organised by activists during the protests to discuss political issues and make demands to the institutions For additional resources on the Protests and Plenum movement as examples of radical politics see Damir Arsenijević, Unbribable Bosnia and Herzegovina: The Fight for the Commons (Nomos Verlagsgesellschaft, 2015).

47. Danijela Majstorović, Zoran Vučkovac, and Anđela Pepić, “From Dayton to Brussels via Tuzla: Post-2014 Economic Restructuring as Europeanization Discourse/Practice in Bosnia and Herzegovina,” Southeast European and Black Sea Studies 15, no. 4 (2015): 661–82.

48. Personal Interview with Udružene Žene activist, Banja Luka, BIH, 25 August 2010.

49. Coomaraswamy, “Preventing Conflict Transforming Justice Securing Peace”; Paul Kirby and Laura J. Shepherd, “Reintroducing Women, Peace and Security,” International Affairs 92, no. 2 (2016): 249–254.

50. Kirby and Shepherd, “The Futures Past of the Women, Peace and Security Agenda.”

51. BiH Action Plan, 21.

52. Personal Interview with UN Women representative, 28 September 2016.

53. “Sound of Silence: Dealing with the Legacy of Sexual Violence as a Weapon of War,” United Nations Population Fund, http://www.unfpa.org/news/sound-silence-dealing-legacy-sexual-violence-weapon-war (accessed 19 December 2016); “Combating Sexual Violence in Conflict,” United Nations Population Fund, http://ba.unfpa.org/publications/combating-sexual-violence-conflict (accessed 19 December 2016).

54. Personal Interview with UN Women representative 28 September 2016. See also https://www.gov.uk/government/policies/sexual-violence-in-conflict.

55. On the notion of feminist constellations and strategic feminist partnerships, see Roberta Guerrina and Katharine AM Wright, “Gendering Normative Power Europe: Lessons of the Women, Peace and Security Agenda,” International Affairs 92, no. 2 (2016): 293–312; Alison Woodward, “Building Velvet Triangles: Gender and Informal Governance,” Informal Governance in the European Union (Cheltenham: Edward Elgar, 2004), 76–93.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Maria-Adriana Deiana

Maria-Adriana Deiana is Lecturer in International Relations in the School of Law and Government, Dublin City University, Ireland. Drawing on feminist approaches to war and security, her research focuses on conflict transformation, the Women, Peace and Security (WPS) agenda, and EU peacekeeping. Email: [email protected]