Protecting Dayton’s Shared Governance by Countering Faux Narratives of Russia’s Influence in Bosnia and Herzegovina

Marta Vrbetic
{"title":"Protecting Dayton’s Shared Governance by Countering Faux Narratives of Russia’s Influence in Bosnia and Herzegovina","authors":"Marta Vrbetic","doi":"10.37458/nstf.25.1.10","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"It is well-known that Russia seeks to undermine the Western order in the Balkans, such as supporting Serbs in their rejection of NATO membership for Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). However, some assertions of Russia’s influence discussed here show no merit and seem to have been brought to delegitimize the Western installed peace order vital to the stability of the region: the 1-2-3 Dayton Peace Agreement (DPA) with one state, two entities, and three constituent peoples (Bosniaks, Serbs, and Croats). The meaningless assertions include disinformation against High Representative Schmidt as a Russia man; the misrepresentation of the U.S. -E.U. led electoral reform as the one benefitting Russia; the frequently repeated falsehoods that NATO and EU member state Croatia is aligned with Putin or that some U.S. officials embrace Russia’s values. Such disinformation narratives do not show the ties between the supposed Russian assets and Kremlin, nor do they demonstrate that the alleged pro-Russian actors pursue pro-Kremlin policies. Instead, they tend to be based on the ludicrous claims that the very support for the Dayton categories of ethnic power-sharing reflects the embrace of Russia’s values under President Putin. Striking at the core of the Dayton peace bargain, the anti-Dayton unitarists want the DPA to guarantee BiH’s external borders, while urging the international community to dismiss the DPA designed two-entity state structure (important to Serbs) or ethnic power-sharing (important to Croats) to impose a centralized, unitary state with a majority rule, or the so-called “civic state.” However, besides thwarting (Serb) secessionism and (Croat) separatism, the purpose of Dayton has been to prevent (Bosniak) majoritarianism. The intensity of the debate surrounding the disinformation activities discussed here shows that--though the DPA still remains relevant to the BiH postwar peace and the Western Balkans stability--the consensus on what Dayton is or should be is now collapsing.","PeriodicalId":506726,"journal":{"name":"National security and the future","volume":"118 14","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-12","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"National security and the future","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.37458/nstf.25.1.10","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

It is well-known that Russia seeks to undermine the Western order in the Balkans, such as supporting Serbs in their rejection of NATO membership for Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). However, some assertions of Russia’s influence discussed here show no merit and seem to have been brought to delegitimize the Western installed peace order vital to the stability of the region: the 1-2-3 Dayton Peace Agreement (DPA) with one state, two entities, and three constituent peoples (Bosniaks, Serbs, and Croats). The meaningless assertions include disinformation against High Representative Schmidt as a Russia man; the misrepresentation of the U.S. -E.U. led electoral reform as the one benefitting Russia; the frequently repeated falsehoods that NATO and EU member state Croatia is aligned with Putin or that some U.S. officials embrace Russia’s values. Such disinformation narratives do not show the ties between the supposed Russian assets and Kremlin, nor do they demonstrate that the alleged pro-Russian actors pursue pro-Kremlin policies. Instead, they tend to be based on the ludicrous claims that the very support for the Dayton categories of ethnic power-sharing reflects the embrace of Russia’s values under President Putin. Striking at the core of the Dayton peace bargain, the anti-Dayton unitarists want the DPA to guarantee BiH’s external borders, while urging the international community to dismiss the DPA designed two-entity state structure (important to Serbs) or ethnic power-sharing (important to Croats) to impose a centralized, unitary state with a majority rule, or the so-called “civic state.” However, besides thwarting (Serb) secessionism and (Croat) separatism, the purpose of Dayton has been to prevent (Bosniak) majoritarianism. The intensity of the debate surrounding the disinformation activities discussed here shows that--though the DPA still remains relevant to the BiH postwar peace and the Western Balkans stability--the consensus on what Dayton is or should be is now collapsing.
驳斥关于俄罗斯在波黑影响力的虚假说法,保护代顿的共同治理
众所周知,俄罗斯试图破坏西方在巴尔干地区的秩序,例如支持塞族人拒绝波黑加入北约。然而,本文讨论的一些关于俄罗斯影响力的论断毫无根据,似乎是为了使西方建立的、对该地区稳定至关重要的和平秩序(即由一个国家、两个实体和三个组成民族(波什尼亚克族、塞尔维亚族和克罗地亚族)组成的 1-2-3 代顿和平协议)失去合法性。这些毫无意义的断言包括将高级代表施密特诬蔑为俄罗斯人;将美国-欧盟领导的选举改革歪曲为有利于俄罗斯;经常重复北约和欧盟成员国克罗地亚与普京结盟或一些美国官员拥护俄罗斯价值观的谎言。这些虚假信息并没有显示所谓的俄罗斯资产与克里姆林宫之间的联系,也没有证明所谓的亲俄人士奉行亲克里姆林宫的政策。相反,它们往往基于一种可笑的说法,即对代顿种族权力分享类别的支持本身就反映了对普京总统领导下的俄罗斯价值观的拥护。反《代顿协定》统一派触及了《代顿和平协定》的核心,他们希望《代顿和平协定》能保证波黑的外部边界,同时敦促国际社会摒弃《代顿和平协定》设计的双实体国家结构(对塞族人来说很重要)或民族权力分享(对克族人来说很重要),转而强加一个由多数人统治的中央集权统一国家,即所谓的 "公民国家"。然而,除了挫败(塞族)分离主义和(克族)分裂主义之外,代顿的目的还在于防止(波什尼亚克族)多数主义。围绕本文所讨论的虚假信息活动的激烈辩论表明--尽管《代顿和平协定》仍然与波黑战后和平和西巴尔干地区的稳定息息相关--关于代顿是什么或应该是什么的共识正在瓦解。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信