Previous posts in this discussion:
PostBosnia-Herzegovina as "Pseudo" State (Eugenio Battaglia, Italy, 12/23/22 2:08 am)
Our esteemed editor asked for my explanation of why I called Bosnia-Herzegovina a pseudo-state (December 19th).
At present Bosnia-Herzegovina is divided into three, or more precisely four, ethnic entities. The division is among the Serbian part denominated Republika Srpska, whose leader wants a prompt reunification with Serbia, and a Federation of Bosnia-Herzegovina where Muslim Bosnians and Catholic Croats temporarily live, even if separated. The real leader of the state, the international High Representative, lives in the small territory of Brcko. There is a collegial Presidency of the State with the three leaders of the main ethnic groups, all of whom hate the others.
In his latest report, the current High Representative Christian Schmidt clearly spoke of a risk of secession of the Republika Srpska, following the speech of its leader Milorad Dodik and his plan for a strong national Serbian Army. Dodik stated, "The truth is there is no agreement that Bosnia-Herzegovina can survive. Serbians and Croats are obliged to live in this state but they will not do this."
Both Croats and Serbs consider the Bosnians as the heirs of those who during the occupation of the Ottoman Empire sided with the Turks.
Remember that the SS Waffen Gebirgs Division der SS "Handschar," blessed by the Gran Mufti Amin al-Husayni of Jerusalem, enjoyed killing Serbs but had fairly good relations with the Ustasha. A the end of WWII hundreds of thousands of them, with their families and other civilians (including Italians), were brutally killed by Tito's Communists with the complicity of the Western Allies. For instance, see the Massacre of Bleiburg.
The war in Bosnia-Herzegovina started on 1 March 1992 between the Croats of the region wanting (rightly) a union with Croatia and the Bosnians wanting to control all the old administrative area.
A initial agreement was reached by the three ethnic groups on 18 March, but on 28 March the Bosnian leader Alya Iszetbegovic after meeting the US Ambassador Warren Zimmerman (receiving orders from Clinton?) reneged on the accord. Meanwhile, the US/NATO supported the Bosnians with arms and volunteers, together with the "good" Al-Qaeda and other veterans of Afghanistan against the USSR. Other Muslim countries sent money and volunteers.
On the night of 26/27, the Croats temporarily united with the Bosnians attacked the Serbs, killing 60 civilians and the war started again, as the Serbs, according to the West are ugly, bad, and friends of Russia, are also the most guilty for the war and the subsequent massacres.
Now the bridge of Mostar (Stari Most) has been rebuilt, but the temporarily federated Croats and Bosnians live separated on each side of the river Narenta and they continue to hate each other.
I believe that no other state in the world can be considered more of a pseudo-state than Bosnia-Herzegovina. The solution is very simple: a unity of local Serbs and Croats with their motherlands plus a small Bosnian state, let it be ruled by the Empire but absolutely not by the new Ottoman Empire as wished by Erdogan or other Gulf States.
JE comments: Eugenio Battaglia reminds us of how we got the term Balkanization. The original "pseudo-state" may indeed have been Yugoslavia, but it survived reasonably well for decades under Tito's iron fist. How is it that some states of great diversity (Switzerland comes to mind) thrive, while others know nothing but divisiveness and chaos? Is it a matter of government policy, or is there something definitive about national "character"?