{"title":"波斯尼亚和黑塞哥维那在代顿之后的25年——在经典的lijphart联盟和他新引入的共识民主之间","authors":"Nikola Ambarkov","doi":"10.20544/icp.11.01.20.p07","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In 2020, Bosnia and Herzegovina marks 25 years since the signing of the Dayton Peace Agreement. The arrangement that was set for the country in Dayton 1995 is referred to the consociational model, which in the policy and science of conflict management was launched by Arend Lijphart. The most important consociational pillars - the grand coalition government, decentralization, adequate representation of the three constituent nations (Serbs, Croats, and Bosniaks) and the veto right, can be recognized in the Dayton political system in Bosnia and Herzegovina. As a political project of passive coexistence and agreement among ethnic elites, the consociational democracy proved to be a very important creator of socio-political processes in many post-conflict regions, regardless of the fact that even its most frenetic supporters confirm that this approach is not perfect. However, in his more recent works, the founding father of this model, Arend Lijphart, abandons the problem of divided societies, and redefines this model of consociational democracy in a way that makes it refer to any society in which there are pluralistic interests. In accordance with the change, he introduces the term - consensual democracy. The core of this consensual model still encompasses the above-mentioned consociational pillars (multiparty government, decentralization, and proportional representation - proportional electoral system) but, now, those are complemented with some new indicators such as interest groups corporatism, bicameralism, constitutional rigidity, developed judicial review, independent central bank and executive – legislative balance. The purpose of this paper is to give an overview of the political system of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 25 years after Dayton, through the prism of these parameters, in a way that shows that, Bosnia and Herzegovina not only meets the classical consociational criteria, but also the parameters of the newly introduced Lijphart’s concept for consensual democracy which can be noted to a large degree in its political order.","PeriodicalId":369411,"journal":{"name":"THE EURO-ATLANTIC VALUES IN THE BALKAN COUNTRIES","volume":"8 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-09-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA 25 YEARS AFTER DAYTON – BETWEEN THE CLASSICAL LIJPHART’S CONSOCIATION AND HIS NEWLY INTRODUCED TERM FOR CONSENSUAL DEMOCRACY\",\"authors\":\"Nikola Ambarkov\",\"doi\":\"10.20544/icp.11.01.20.p07\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In 2020, Bosnia and Herzegovina marks 25 years since the signing of the Dayton Peace Agreement. The arrangement that was set for the country in Dayton 1995 is referred to the consociational model, which in the policy and science of conflict management was launched by Arend Lijphart. The most important consociational pillars - the grand coalition government, decentralization, adequate representation of the three constituent nations (Serbs, Croats, and Bosniaks) and the veto right, can be recognized in the Dayton political system in Bosnia and Herzegovina. As a political project of passive coexistence and agreement among ethnic elites, the consociational democracy proved to be a very important creator of socio-political processes in many post-conflict regions, regardless of the fact that even its most frenetic supporters confirm that this approach is not perfect. However, in his more recent works, the founding father of this model, Arend Lijphart, abandons the problem of divided societies, and redefines this model of consociational democracy in a way that makes it refer to any society in which there are pluralistic interests. In accordance with the change, he introduces the term - consensual democracy. The core of this consensual model still encompasses the above-mentioned consociational pillars (multiparty government, decentralization, and proportional representation - proportional electoral system) but, now, those are complemented with some new indicators such as interest groups corporatism, bicameralism, constitutional rigidity, developed judicial review, independent central bank and executive – legislative balance. The purpose of this paper is to give an overview of the political system of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 25 years after Dayton, through the prism of these parameters, in a way that shows that, Bosnia and Herzegovina not only meets the classical consociational criteria, but also the parameters of the newly introduced Lijphart’s concept for consensual democracy which can be noted to a large degree in its political order.\",\"PeriodicalId\":369411,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"THE EURO-ATLANTIC VALUES IN THE BALKAN COUNTRIES\",\"volume\":\"8 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-09-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"THE EURO-ATLANTIC VALUES IN THE BALKAN COUNTRIES\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.20544/icp.11.01.20.p07\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"THE EURO-ATLANTIC VALUES IN THE BALKAN COUNTRIES","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20544/icp.11.01.20.p07","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA 25 YEARS AFTER DAYTON – BETWEEN THE CLASSICAL LIJPHART’S CONSOCIATION AND HIS NEWLY INTRODUCED TERM FOR CONSENSUAL DEMOCRACY
In 2020, Bosnia and Herzegovina marks 25 years since the signing of the Dayton Peace Agreement. The arrangement that was set for the country in Dayton 1995 is referred to the consociational model, which in the policy and science of conflict management was launched by Arend Lijphart. The most important consociational pillars - the grand coalition government, decentralization, adequate representation of the three constituent nations (Serbs, Croats, and Bosniaks) and the veto right, can be recognized in the Dayton political system in Bosnia and Herzegovina. As a political project of passive coexistence and agreement among ethnic elites, the consociational democracy proved to be a very important creator of socio-political processes in many post-conflict regions, regardless of the fact that even its most frenetic supporters confirm that this approach is not perfect. However, in his more recent works, the founding father of this model, Arend Lijphart, abandons the problem of divided societies, and redefines this model of consociational democracy in a way that makes it refer to any society in which there are pluralistic interests. In accordance with the change, he introduces the term - consensual democracy. The core of this consensual model still encompasses the above-mentioned consociational pillars (multiparty government, decentralization, and proportional representation - proportional electoral system) but, now, those are complemented with some new indicators such as interest groups corporatism, bicameralism, constitutional rigidity, developed judicial review, independent central bank and executive – legislative balance. The purpose of this paper is to give an overview of the political system of Bosnia and Herzegovina, 25 years after Dayton, through the prism of these parameters, in a way that shows that, Bosnia and Herzegovina not only meets the classical consociational criteria, but also the parameters of the newly introduced Lijphart’s concept for consensual democracy which can be noted to a large degree in its political order.