Fractured state: why old tensions die hard in Bosnia and Herzegovina?

A few weeks after returning from Ukraine, with most foreign media having scaled down their presence in the war-torn country, I was asked to dig into the conflict's potential knock-on effects in other parts of Europe. 

There were fears that inter-ethnic violence could spill over into the Western Balkans, most likely igniting first in Bosnia and Herzegovina. These concerns had been fuelled by repeated threats by the political leadership of the country’s Serbian entity to separate from the rest of the nation’s state institutions. Ambitions which have been repeatedly met with Russia's support.

As I landed in Sarajevo, the country’s capital, I warmed at the thought of once again encountering communities that I had seen go through many changes and challenges during my reports over the years, following the end of the three-year war there in 1995. 

I knew that the order imposed by the Dayton Agreement, was not always to the liking of the different Bosniak, Croat and Serbian components of the population, and many issues were far from resolved.

But I wanted to know for sure whether the current tensions were as serious as the media and international community were portraying them to be and to what extent people were prepared to go through another cycle of violence. After all, they had endured the 20th century’s bloodiest conflict on European soil since World War II.

“Serbs, Bosniaks and Croats work together and survive together," Ervin told me. 

“Authorities create divisions, confusion, and play on fear. They push people to withdraw into their ethnic groups and their 1992 positions. This helps politicians hold onto power, and abuse the state, while people are just trying to survive and make ends meet,” he added. 

A war camp returnee,