Start Date
12-1-2012 10:30 AM
End Date
12-1-2012 12:00 PM
Description
No one credibly disputes that Bošnjaks (Bosnian Muslims) were the victims of genocide during the war of the early-90’s. This status is however currently being used against them by their own ethnic political elite. Former State-President Haris Silajdzic has shamelessly adopted the ‘political pose of victimhood’ to further his own political agenda to the detriment of those who genuinely deserve support and recognition. Silajdzic has led the evolution of a post-war Bošnjak identity based solely upon this victim-status. In terms of post-war state-building and conflict-transformation progress is not just obstructed but entirely paralysed by the hostile dynamic inherent in the absolute categories of victim:perpetrator. If identity is premised solely upon victimhood then not only will a reduction in perceived external threat jeopardise group-solidarity but the identity itself will be endangered by reconciliation with the persecutor. Such a stance therefore precludes the possibility of engagement with the allegedly still ‘sociocidal’ Serbs on even unrelated issues leading to political deadlock and socio-economic stagnation. This political pose of victimhood has clear political benefits vis-à-vis the silencing of opposition and maintaining Silajdzic’s hold on power as Tihomir Loza observes: ‘…how exactly do you question someone promising to undo Srebrenica’s tragedy? You just don’t?’ . Silajdzic’s specific focus on Srebrenica is strategic and not only, or even primarily, directed at his domestic audience. What makes Srebrenica useful is its status as the shibboleth of all international failings in BiH. A deserved degree of guilt elicited by its name coupled with a tacit anti-Republika Srpska prejudice stemming from the acts of the war has kept the international community silent during Silajdzic’s increasingly strident anti-entity pronouncements thereby heightening tensions in-country to their current level. Not only has the continued abuse of Bosnia’s people by their own political elite resulted in diminished life-chances for all ethnic groups; So too has international silence on the issue led to a situation of conflict-exacerbation instead of transformation in the last decade. I intend to describe the process and motivation behind this political exploitation of victimhood in post-war Bosnia, analyse its most pertinent consequences, their cross-conflict implications and discuss the impact on those who have survived genocide. Williams, G. (2008) 'Dangerous victims: On some political dangers of vicarious claims to victimhood,' Distinktion - Scandinavian Journal of Social Theory 17pp77-95 p81 Statement by Haris Silajdzic, 27 January 2000, to the Stockholm International Forum on the Holocaust at http://balkan-studies.blogspot.com/2006/06/bosniaks-honor-holocaust-victims.html Loza, T. (2007) ‘Playing With Srebrenica’ Transitions Online 20 March at http://www.tol.org/client/article/18402-playing-with-srebrenica.html
The Politicisation of Victimhood
No one credibly disputes that Bošnjaks (Bosnian Muslims) were the victims of genocide during the war of the early-90’s. This status is however currently being used against them by their own ethnic political elite. Former State-President Haris Silajdzic has shamelessly adopted the ‘political pose of victimhood’ to further his own political agenda to the detriment of those who genuinely deserve support and recognition. Silajdzic has led the evolution of a post-war Bošnjak identity based solely upon this victim-status. In terms of post-war state-building and conflict-transformation progress is not just obstructed but entirely paralysed by the hostile dynamic inherent in the absolute categories of victim:perpetrator. If identity is premised solely upon victimhood then not only will a reduction in perceived external threat jeopardise group-solidarity but the identity itself will be endangered by reconciliation with the persecutor. Such a stance therefore precludes the possibility of engagement with the allegedly still ‘sociocidal’ Serbs on even unrelated issues leading to political deadlock and socio-economic stagnation. This political pose of victimhood has clear political benefits vis-à-vis the silencing of opposition and maintaining Silajdzic’s hold on power as Tihomir Loza observes: ‘…how exactly do you question someone promising to undo Srebrenica’s tragedy? You just don’t?’ . Silajdzic’s specific focus on Srebrenica is strategic and not only, or even primarily, directed at his domestic audience. What makes Srebrenica useful is its status as the shibboleth of all international failings in BiH. A deserved degree of guilt elicited by its name coupled with a tacit anti-Republika Srpska prejudice stemming from the acts of the war has kept the international community silent during Silajdzic’s increasingly strident anti-entity pronouncements thereby heightening tensions in-country to their current level. Not only has the continued abuse of Bosnia’s people by their own political elite resulted in diminished life-chances for all ethnic groups; So too has international silence on the issue led to a situation of conflict-exacerbation instead of transformation in the last decade. I intend to describe the process and motivation behind this political exploitation of victimhood in post-war Bosnia, analyse its most pertinent consequences, their cross-conflict implications and discuss the impact on those who have survived genocide. Williams, G. (2008) 'Dangerous victims: On some political dangers of vicarious claims to victimhood,' Distinktion - Scandinavian Journal of Social Theory 17pp77-95 p81 Statement by Haris Silajdzic, 27 January 2000, to the Stockholm International Forum on the Holocaust at http://balkan-studies.blogspot.com/2006/06/bosniaks-honor-holocaust-victims.html Loza, T. (2007) ‘Playing With Srebrenica’ Transitions Online 20 March at http://www.tol.org/client/article/18402-playing-with-srebrenica.html