Introduction
The role of ethnicity in conflict has become the main focus of political science, sociology, and international relations. Kaufman (2001) has examined how ethnicity can induce and fuel conflict and the conditions under which ethnic variances can be accomplished peacefully. The war in Bosnia and Herzegovina offers a useful case study to scrutinize the relationship between ethnicity and conflict. It involved three main ethnic groups in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bosnian Muslims, Croats, and Serbs (Van Steenwijk, 2019).
In addition, the theory of nationalism explains how ethnicity can lead to conflict in a given region. It asserts that people with common traits, such as language, religion, or culture, should form their sovereign nation-state. Therefore, ethnicity is a major factor in the development of conflict, and its influence can be seen in the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
The Theory of Nationalism
The theory of nationalism posits that the nation is the central unit of social and political organization and is composed of a community of people who share a common language, history, culture, and territory. In the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina, nationalism played a significant role in the outbreak of most ethnic violence (Van Steenwijk, 2019). Bosnia and Herzegovina had a complex ethnic composition, with three major ethnic groups, Bosniaks, Serbs, and Croats. However, in the late 1980s and early 1990s, rising nationalism in Yugoslavia, driven by the collapse of the communist government and the Soviet Union, started to destabilize the country (Van Steenwijk, 2019). Nationalist politicians began to exploit ethnic tensions to gain power, and nationalist propaganda started to spread across the country.
In Bosnia and Herzegovina, politicians from all sides began to appeal to the fears and complaints of their respective ethnic groups. The Bosniaks, who had historically been the largest ethnic group in the country, feared that the Serbs and Croats would join forces to create a Greater Serbia (Van Steenwijk, 2019). In addition, they were afraid that they would be marginalized or even expelled from their land.
The political leaders used this fear to control the Bosniaks and gain more power. For example, the Bosniaks could not trust the other ethnic groups, and their rights were not protected. This led to the Bosnian War and the country’s eventual split into three parts (Van Steenwijk, 2019). Therefore, the Bosniaks still struggle to regain trust and create a safe, prosperous, and unified nation.
The Serbs, who had long felt a sense of grievance and victimization, saw themselves as defenders of Orthodox Christianity against the perceived threat of Islamization. Politicians from all sides attempted to use the concerns and grievances of their ethnic groups in Bosnia and Herzegovina (Todd, 2018). This required the Serbs to play on their deep-seated sense of resentment and victimization and to position themselves as the guardians of Orthodox Christianity against a purported threat from Islamization.
For example, the Muslim-Croatian coalition, they believed, was intended to erase Serb identity. The Bosnian Serbs maintained that they needed to defend their culture, faith, and way of life against its alleged hostile intentions (Todd, 2018). Thus, Serbs, who had endured centuries of prejudice, brutality, and human rights violations, were open to this message.
Moreover, the Croats, a minority in Bosnia and Herzegovina, feared that the other two groups would dominate them and that their cultural identity would be suppressed. The future of their cultural identity was a legitimate concern for the Croats of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Todd, 2018). They observed that politicians from other ethnic groups were invoking dread in their communities despite being a minority in the nation.
Additionally, these politicians were preying on the anxieties of their separate ethnic groups, asserting that their people would be subjugated to the other two groups and that their cultural identity would be stifled. It was a risky approach that easily resulted in heightened hostility and violence (Todd, 2018). As a result, the Croats were concerned about protecting their identity and culture from future hegemony.
The Case Study of Bosnia and Herzegovina
The conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina is a catastrophic demonstration of the influence of ethnic differences and the dangers they may pose. The war started in 1992 and ended in 1995, with more than 100,000 people being killed and 2 million people being displaced (Mijić, 2021). During this conflict, Bosnia’s three major ethnic groups, Serbs, Croats, and Muslims, fought each other in the battle.
In February 1992, Bosnia and Herzegovina held a referendum on seceding from Yugoslavia, which sparked the start of the war (Mijić, 2021). Furthermore, Bosnian Muslims supported the referendum, whereas Serbs, who comprised most of the population, opposed it. Thus, the Bosnian Serbs started preparing for war after Bosnia’s independence was overwhelmingly approved in the referendum.
Additionally, Bosnia and Herzegovina’s war had a significant political impact. The conflict served as a reminder of the significance of ethnic differences and the necessity of ethnic tolerance (Van Steenwijk, 2019). Additionally, it proved the necessity for stronger international institutions to maintain stability and peace.
The war in Bosnia and Herzegovina is a terrible illustration of the influence of ethnic differences and the possible repercussions (Van Steenwijk, 2019). The war was a significant international battle that brought attention to the need for more robust international institutions and tolerance of different ethnic groups. The conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina serves as an unsettling reminder of the effects of ethnic tensions and the necessity of cooperation to prevent future crises of this nature.
How Ethnicity Contributed to War in Bosnia and Herzegovina
Historical Context of Ethnic Divisions
The origins of the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina are deep and complex. Tensions between various ethnic groups and religions have existed in the area for many years. The Ottoman Empire ruled Bosnia and Herzegovina for centuries, and it was during this period that Islam became the dominant religion in the region (Kaufman, 2001).
The population started splitting along racial and religious lines once the Austro-Hungarian Empire took over the region in the late 19th century (Bjelajac, 2019). The tensions, such as the fear of being oppressed by other ethnic groups, would eventually trigger conflict due to the country’s history of colonization and occupation (Kaufman, 2001). Thus, Serbs, Croats, and Bosniaks comprised the majority of the provinces in the Ottoman Empire, which was divided into these provinces based on ethnicity.
The historical, ethnic splits in the region can be largely blamed for the conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Yugoslavia was divided into the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia, ruled by Serbs, and the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina, led by Croats and Bosniaks (Kaufman, 2001). In addition, as each group fought to preserve its unique national identity, this division exacerbated the already-present ethnic tensions. Based on this, there was an increase in mistrust and hostility between the various tribes, which ultimately resulted in war (Esman & Telhami, 2019). Therefore, one of the primary causes of the battle was ethnic differences as each group fought to maintain its political and cultural autonomy.
Different Goals for the Future of Bosnia and Herzegovina
Ethnic tensions have been a significant cause of conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina since its establishment. The three major ethnic groups in the area, the Serbs, Croats, and Bosniaks, have all had various aspirations for the state’s future (Mulalic, 2019). The Croats and Bosniaks desired independence and a multiethnic state. In contrast, the Serbs intended to establish a single, Serb-dominated state.
As each group fought to establish its vision for the nation, these disparities in objectives exacerbated tensions between the groups. The rivalry between the ethnic groups has caused ongoing warfare. Unfortunately, the lack of consensus over the state’s future has been a significant barrier to regional peace and security (Hone, 2020). Therefore, the difference in the country’s vision among the three ethnic groups contributed to the outbreak of the war.
Different Levels of Access to Resources and Power
Before the war, the ethnic groups in Bosnia and Herzegovina had unequal access to resources and political power. This increased tensions between the various ethnic groups as they sought more control and power (Todd, 2018). The Bosnian Muslims were the largest ethnic group and had the most access to power, while the Serbs and Croats had a much lower power level.
This imbalance was further impaired by the legacy of the previous Yugoslavian state, where the Serbs were the dominant group and had a greater say in the political system (Van Steenwijk, 2019). The unequal access to resources and power meant that each ethnic group competed with the other groups for resources and power. Thus, the lack of access to resources and power for certain groups was used as a means of oppression by some groups, leading to widespread discrimination and violence against these groups.
During the socialist era, Bosniak Muslims and Croats were underrepresented in the higher echelons of the economy. At the same time, the Serbs held a disproportionately large share of economic power. One reason for anger and hostility between various ethnic groups was the unequal allocation of economic power (Van Steenwijk, 2019).
The rise of market capitalism and privatization in Bosnia and Herzegovina following the dissolution of Yugoslavia widened racial and economic divides. In addition, the established Serbian business class, which was able to use its financial power to uphold its domination in the post-Yugoslav economy, struggled to compete with the Bosniak Muslims and Croats (Van Steenwijk, 2019). As a result, due to increased ethnic divisions, war broke out in Bosnia and Herzegovina, leading to the Siege of Sarajevo.
The Role of Nationalism
Ethno-nationalism is among the major causes of the Bosnian War. Nationalism was used to mobilize support for various parties in the conflict in many countries (Wellings, 2022). By combining the Serb populations of Bosnia, Herzegovina, and Serbia into a single country, the Serb forces sought to establish a Greater Serbia. This was accomplished through the violent and widespread displacement of non-Serbs from areas designated as Serb lands.
Nationalism was a major factor in this conflict since it was used to excuse crimes against civilians, including the Srebrenica massacre, which resulted in the deaths of many Bosniak men (Van Steenwijk, 2019). The use of nationalism contributed to distrust between different ethnic groups in the region, making it difficult to achieve lasting peace. Moreover, the Bosnian war was not the only time nationalism could have led to conflict. It has played a role in numerous historical conflicts, from Yugoslavia’s dissolution to Rwanda’s massacre (Kaufman, 2001). Nationalism led to a situation where some ethnic groups may feel superior and entitled, disregarding the rights of other communities.
Furthermore, there may be violent conflict as each group tries to establish dominance over the other (Kaufman, 2001). For example, the Serbs wanted to rule over Croats and Bosniaks, resulting in conflict. The war showed how nationalism can be used to promote support for armed war and how catastrophic its ramifications can be for innocent bystanders. Thus, the power of nationalism in breeding conflict was exposed in the Bosnian War.
Language Barrier Between the Three Ethnic Groups
The language barrier in Bosnia and Herzegovina has contributed to segregation and division between the different ethnic groups. Due to each group’s distinct languages, cultures, and identities, there is a feeling of segregation and loneliness (Anderson, 2006). Each group now feels ignored and marginalized due to ineffective communication, which breeds resentment and antagonism toward other groups.
This has made the ethnic division and conflict even more pronounced, making it difficult to resolve. This lack of comprehension and understanding has resulted in miscommunications, misinterpretations, and mistrust between the groups (Anderson, 2006). Therefore, the difference in language between the three ethnic groups has been a significant cause of strife in the nation, which has led to bloodshed, evictions, and long-standing ethnic tensions.
Moreover, the language variation between Serbs, Croats, and Bosniaks significantly impacted education, employment, and social interactions, as language skills usually limit individuals. A feeling of exclusion and marginalization due to a language barrier resulted in under- and non-representation in decision-making processes (Anderson, 2006). The fact that each group is frequently given a different perspective on situations, causing even more uncertainty and misunderstanding, has contributed to a lack of faith in the media due to the language barrier. As a result, the lack of understanding due to variation in language between groups has contributed to a sense of isolation and segregation, further entrenching the divide between communities.
The Influence of Media on The Ethnic Groups
The three main ethnic groups in Bosnia and Herzegovina have all faced biased and negative media representation. This has contributed significantly to the country’s continuous conflicts and fostered mistrust and hostility between the tribes (Anderson, 2006). There is a lack of sympathy and understanding for the opposing side since each party feels mistreated and misunderstood.
The propagation of propaganda and the maintenance of stereotypes by the media contribute to the conflict’s escalation (Anderson, 2006). For instance, the Croats were portrayed as a fascist movement from World War II, the Bosniaks as Islamic fanatics, and the Serbs as perpetrators. As a result, these representations frequently oversimplified and exaggerated the conflict’s complexity and diversity within each group.
Moreover, the negative media depiction of each group contributed to distrust and hatred. Each ethnic group in the country felt misrepresented and misunderstood, which fueled their determination to be portrayed more positively (Anderson, 2006). This made it difficult for them to build trust and understanding, as they normally perceive each other through biased media portrayals.
Additionally, negative media representation has created a sense of victimhood and a desire for revenge, as each group perceives itself as the target of unfair treatment, culminating in war in the country (Van Steenwijk, 2019). The undesirable depiction of each group in the media created animosity between the three groups. It has been a major source of conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina since the dissolution of Yugoslavia.
The Fear of Assimilation
Bosniaks, Croats, and Serbs have distinct cultures, languages, and histories, which they are determined to preserve. However, as each group attempts to establish dominance and safeguard its interests, this determination to maintain its distinct identity has frequently resulted in conflict and tension. Every ethnic group believed that any attempt to meld into one nation would result in losing its cultural history, a major source of this conflict.
In addition, the history and religion of the Bosniaks, Croats, and Serbs are fundamental components of their identity. Each group takes great pleasure in its customs and beliefs and regards itself as apart from others. Therefore, this has made it difficult for them to unite and form a unified country, as each group is wary of losing its identity.
The conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina was primarily driven by ethnic differences, with the country’s Serbs, Croats, and Bosniaks (Bosnian Muslims) vying for political power and control. Each group wanted to safeguard its political interests, and a unified Bosnia and Herzegovina would mean sharing power and resources, which could threaten their political influence. This escalated tensions, with nationalist rhetoric and propaganda fueling hatred and mistrust. The breakup of Yugoslavia in the early 1990s only exacerbated these tensions, as each ethnic group sought to establish its state or territory (Van Steenwijk, 2019). The result was a brutal conflict that lasted for years, characterized by widespread violence, ethnic cleansing, and atrocities committed by all sides.
The Lack of Representation
Bosnia and Herzegovina has a complex political system where power is shared among three ethnic groups: Bosniaks, Croats, and Serbs. Each group has its political parties and leaders who aim to enhance their interests and protect the rights of their respective communities (Todd, 2018). However, this has led to a deeply divided society, with each group feeling marginalized and underrepresented in politics.
Political disputes are common, and progress is often impeded by each group’s veto power (Todd, 2018). This has contributed to frustration and disillusionment among many citizens who feel their voices are not being heard. Therefore, the lack of trust and cooperation among the ethnic groups due to perceived misrepresentation contributed to hatred, leading to the war in Sarajevo.
Conclusion
Ethnicity has played a significant role in shaping conflicts throughout history, and Bosnia and Herzegovina is no exception. Bosnia and Herzegovina has been a multiethnic and multireligious society, with Bosniaks, Serbs, and Croats being the three main ethnic groups. After the dissolution of Yugoslavia in the early 1990s, Bosnia and Herzegovina declared independence, which sparked a civil war between the ethnic groups.
The conflict was powered by deep-rooted ethnic and religious differences, with each group seeking dominance and control over the others. This animosity dates back to the Ottoman and Austro-Hungarian Empires, when the three groups were placed in different regions and had unique experiences. As a result, each group developed a distinct cultural identity and a deep-seated distrust of the other groups.
References
Anderson, B. (2006). Imagined communities: Reflections on the origin and spread of nationalism. Verso Books.
Bjelajac, M. (2019). The Austro-Hungarian creation of a “Humanitarian” pretext for the planned invasion of Serbia in 1912–1913: Facts and counter-facts. Balcanica, (L), 131-156. Web.
Esman, M. J., & Telhami, S. (Eds.). (2019). International organizations and ethnic conflict. Cornell University Press.
Hone, M. J. (2020). How Ethnic and Religious Nationalism Threaten the Bosnian State. Occasional Papers on Religion in Eastern Europe, 40(1), 8. Web.
Kaufman, S. J. (2001). Modern hatreds: The symbolic politics of ethnic war. Cornell University Press.
Mijić, A. (2021). Identity, ethnic boundaries, and collective victimhood: Analyzing strategies of self-victimization in postwar Bosnia-Herzegovina. Identities, 28(4), 472-491. Web.
Mulalic, M. (2019). Ethnic Cleansing, Genocide and Demographic Changes in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Journal of Balkan and Black Sea Studies, (2), 57-81. Web.
Todd, J. (2018). The politics of identity change and conflict: An agenda for research. Politics, 38(1), 84-93. Web.
Van Steenwijk, M. (2019). International Diplomacy, Religion, and Reconciliation [Unpublished doctoral dissertation]. University of Groningen.
Wellings, B. (2022). Nationalism and European disintegration. Nations and Nationalism.