13 / 514
Nuray BOZBORA
n
2
The results of 1990 elections has two main significant implications: First is that the key determinant of voter
behavior was ethnic-national identification. The second is that the nationalist policies gained a democratic legiti-
macy. Hence, that the republics consequtively declared their independence after 1990 general elections and the
following events can be evaluated as important reflections of the above mentioned points. Bosnia-Herzegovinia
was the one to be negatively affected at most by these developments (Dvornik, 2009: 88).
The results of the first democratic elections in Bosnia and Herzegovinia was the clearest example of electoral
behavior on ethnic base as well. The combination of the votes gained by the major nationalist political parties was
representing major three ethnic groups in this republic. However, since no one alone of those political parties
could not have the legitimacy to govern the Bosnian-Herzegovinian national politics, the following developments
showed the most painful instance of ethnic-nationalist politics (Dvornik, 2009: 88).
That the Bosnian Serbs established a separate republic in the borders of Bosnia-Herzegovinia in 1991 and held a
referendum on staying in the borders of Yugoslavia was the first sign of future events. The boycotting of Bosnia-
Herzegovinia’s referendum for freedom by the Bosnian Serbs has been publicly supported by Miloseviç and then
took an agressive form. These developments led the country to a bloody civil war which took three years.
That the attemps for peace by the international community among the parts prior to and during the war, remained
inconclusive, removed favorable conditions for the parts to live together and contributed to religious and ethnic
identities to gain strength and solidarity. So, the new order brought by Dayton Peace Agreement (DAP) for Bosnia
and Herzegovinia reflected the deep cleaveges in the society on the one hand and provided its continuity on the
other.
The primary aim of DAP which constitutes the actual legal framework of political order in Bosnia-Herzegovinia
was to build the peace and then to construct a base for a unified multi-ethnic democracy. Providing peace and
security was the military side of the matter. It was implemented to great extent by the efforts of NATO stability
force which served in the region by 2004. But, the problems faced in creating a unified and multi-ethnic democ-
racy in the region caused serious critics and questioning of Dayton system in the academic and international
communities.
The Dayton system have been questioned regarding a series of dilemmas. These dilemmas can be summerized in
three basic points:
The first is that the Dayton system established an administrative and political structure which beefed up the eth-
nic and nationalist cleavages in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). To the extent that this model which is known as
consociatioal democracy blocks the development of democracy based on multi-ethnic base, international involve-
ment in the region will perpetuate.
The second is the matter of legitimacy of OHR (Office of Highly Representative) which ultimately represents the
international involvement in the region under the Dayton system. The presence of this institution which is neither
democratic nor reflects the will of BiH people is considered as a significant obstacle to the democratic develop-
ment in the BİH. A similar problem appears in the hybrid nature of the BiH Constitutional Court in which three
international judge serve.
And the third one is the uncompromising attitude of local political actors about the constitution of a strong cen-
tral state which is considered as an essential requirement for a multi-ethnic democracy. This situation feeds the
persistence of the conditions which requires and legitimizes the international involvement in the region.
1. Ethnizitation in Politics; Consociational Model of Democracy in Bosnia-Herzegovina
Dayton Peace Agreement has implemented a consociational model of democracy in the BiH based on formal
power-sharing along the main axis of social division.
The main features of this model, which is usually applied in societies where there are deep divisions are; 1) the
important collectives /segments that make up society has a wide autonomy. 2)There is a central government and
public institutions established through a broad coalition of autonomous structures. 3) There is a quota system