Advertisement

Addressing the Symptoms Through Civil Society Building

  • Roberto BelloniEmail author
Chapter
  • 222 Downloads
Part of the Rethinking Peace and Conflict Studies book series (RCS)

Abstract

The rise and affirmation of intransigent ethno-national leaders in the early phase of peacebuilding induced external interveners to consider alternative avenues to influence domestic political dynamics. They identified civil society as the arena able to mediate and possibly solve peacebuilding contradictions. Focusing on the case of Bosnia-Herzegovina, this chapter shows how the top-down, NGO-focused, technocratic nature of civil society building rendered local organizations disembedded from domestic structures. In particular, the attempt to support the ‘demand side’ of reform through the funding of civil society’s anti-corruption activities proved to be ineffective. Since the early 2000s the increasing role of the EU in the country did not improve the situation. Despite the rhetoric on participation, inclusion and ownership, the EU furthered a narrow vision of civil society instrumentally focused on NGOs.

Keywords

Civil society Anti-corruption NGOs 

References

  1. Ashdown, P. (2007). Swords and ploughshares: Bringing peace to the 21st century. London: Weidenfeld & Nicolson.Google Scholar
  2. Belloni, R. (2001). Civil society and peacebuilding in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Journal of Peace Research, 38(2), 163–180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Belloni, R. (2008a). State building and international intervention in Bosnia-Herzegovina. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  4. Belloni, R. (2008b). Civil society in war-to-democracy transitions. In A. Jarstad & T. Sisk (Eds.), From war to democracy: Dilemmas of peacebuilding (pp. 182–210). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Belloni, R. (2012). Part of the problem or part of the solution? Civil society and corruption in post-conflict states. In D. Zaum & C. Cheng (Eds.), Selling the peace: Post-conflict peacebuilding and corruption (pp. 220–238). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  6. Belloni, R., & Hemmer, B. (2010). Bosnia-Herzegovina: Building civil society under a semiprotectorate. In T. Paffenholz (Ed.), Civil society and peacebuilding: A critical assessment (pp. 129–152). Boulder: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  7. Bieber, F. (2005). Post-war Bosnia-Herzegovina: Ethnicity, equality and public sector governance. Basingstoke: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  8. Blagovcanin, S., & Divjak, B. (2015). How Bosnia-Herzegovina’s political economy holds it back and what to do about it. Washington, DC: Johns Hopkins University Centre for Transatlantic Studies.Google Scholar
  9. Bose, S. (2002). Bosnia-Herzegovina after Dayton: Nationalist partition and international intervention. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  10. BTI (Bertelsmann Stiftung). (2009). BTI 2010—Bosnia-Herzegovina country report. Gütersloh: Bertelsmann Stiftung.Google Scholar
  11. Campbell, D. (1999). Apartheid cartography: The political anthropology and spatial effects of international diplomacy in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Political Geography, 18(4), 395–435.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Caplan, R. (2000). Assessing Dayton: The structural weaknesses of the general framework agreement for peace in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Diplomacy & Statecraft, 11(2), 213–232.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Center for Investigative Reporting. (2012). Non-profits collect millions from government budgets (Resource document). http://www.cin.ba. Accessed 5 December 2013.
  14. Chandler, D. (1999). Bosnia-Herzegovina: Faking democracy after Dayton. London: Pluto Press.Google Scholar
  15. Chandler, D. (2010). The EU and southeastern Europe: The rise of post-liberal governance. Third World Quarterly, 31(1), 69–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Džihić, V., & Wieser, A. (2011). Incentives for democratisation? Effects of EU conditionality on democracy in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Europe-Asia Studies, 63(10), 1803–1825.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Edwards, M. (2003). Civil society. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  18. European Commission. (2005, June 29). Civil society dialogue between the EU and candidate countries. http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/enlargement/ongoing_enlargement/e50022_en.htm.
  19. European Commission. (2007). Multi-annual indicative planning document 2007–2009 for Bosnia-Herzegovina. http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/mipd_Bosnia-Herzegovina_herzegovina_2007_2009_en.pdf.
  20. European Commission. (2011, October 12). Bosnia-Herzegovina 2011 progress report. SEC (2011) 1206 final. http://ec.europa.eu/enlargement/pdf/key_documents/2011/package/ba_rapport_2011_en.pdf.
  21. European Commission. (2012, September 12). The roots of democracy and sustainable development: Europe’s engagement with civil society in external relations. Communication from the commission to the European Parliament, the council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions, Brussels. http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2012:0492:FIN:EN:PDF.
  22. Fagan, A. (2010). Europe’s Balkan dilemma: Paths to civil society or state-building? London: I.B. Tauris.Google Scholar
  23. Finke, B. (2007). Civil society participation in EU governance. Living Review in European Governance, 2(2). www.livingreviews.org/lreg-2007-2. Accessed 5 February 2012.
  24. FPI BH (Foreign Policy Initiative Bosnia-Herzegovina Herzegovina). (2008). Governance structures in BiH: Capacity, ownership, EU integration, functioning state. Sarajevo: FPI BH.Google Scholar
  25. Hakånsson, P., & Sjöholm, F. (2007). Who do you trust? Ethnicity and trust in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Europe–Asia Studies, 59(6), 961–976.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Hulsey, J. (2010). ‘Why did they vote for those guys again?’ Challenges and contradictions in the promotion of political moderation in post-war Bosnia-Herzegovina. Democratization, 17(6), 1132–1152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Kappler, S., & Richmond, O. P. (2011). Peacebuilding in Bosnia and Herzegovina: Resistance or emancipation? Security Dialogue, 42(3), 261–278.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Kurki, M. (2011). Governmentality and EU democracy promotion: The European instrument for democracy and human rights and the construction of democratic civil societies. International Political Sociology, 5(4), 349–366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. McMahon, P. C. (2017). The NGO game: Post-conflict peacebuilding in the Balkans and beyond. Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Migdal, J. (2001). State in society: Studying how states and societies transform and constitute one another. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Mujkić, A. (2007). We, the citizens of ethnopolitics. Constellations, 14(1), 112–128.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Mujkić, A., & Hulsey, J. (2010). Explaining the success of nationalist parties in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Croatian Political Science Review, 47(2), 143–158.Google Scholar
  33. Nansen Dialogue Centre Sarajevo and Saferworld. (2012, March). Leaving the past behind: The perceptions of youth in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Sarajevo: Saferworld.Google Scholar
  34. O’Brennan, J. (2013). The European Commission, enlargement policy and civil society in the Western Balkans. In V. Bojicic-Dzelilovic, J. Ker-Lindsay, & D. Kostovicova (Eds.), Civil society and transitions in the Western Balkans (pp. 29–46). London: Palgrave.Google Scholar
  35. O’Loughlin, J. (2010). Inter-ethnic friendships in post-war Bosnia-Herzegovina. Ethnicities, 10(1), 26–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Paffenholz, T. (Ed.). (2010). Civil society and peacebuilding: A critical assessment. Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner.Google Scholar
  37. Partners Limited. (2005, April). Striking a balance—Efficiency, effectiveness and accountability: The impact of the EU financial regulation on the relationship between the European Commission and NGOs. Brussels.Google Scholar
  38. Perry, V. (2015). A cross-cutting survey of corruption and anti-corruption issues in Bosnia and Herzegovina: Overview, challenges and recommendations. Sarajevo: USAID.Google Scholar
  39. Petritsch, W. (2001). Bosna i Hercegovina: od Daytona do Evrope. Sarajevo: Svjetlost.Google Scholar
  40. Putnam, R. (1993). Making democracy work: Civic traditions in modern Italy. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Rehn, O. (2008, April 17). Civil society at the heart of the EU’s enlargement agenda. Speech by the EU Commissioner Olli Rehn, conference on civil society development in Southeast Europe: Building Europe together, Brussels. SPEECH/08/201. http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_SPEECH-08-201_en.htm.
  42. Richmond, O., Björkdahl, A., & Kappler, S. (2011). The emerging EU peacebuilding framework: Confirming or transcending liberal peacebuilding? Cambridge Review of International Affairs, 24(3), 449–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Sampson, S. (2002). Weak states, uncivil societies and thousands of NGOs: Western democracy export as benevolent colonialism in the Balkans. In S. Resić & B. Tornquist-Pewa (Eds.), Cultural boundaries of the Balkans (pp. 27–44). Lund: Lund University Press.Google Scholar
  44. Scharbatke-Church, C., & Reiling, K. (2009). Lillies that fester: Seeds of corruption and peacebuilding. New Routes: A Journal of Peace Research and Action, 14(3–4), 4–9.Google Scholar
  45. Sejfija, I. (2006). From the civil sector to civil society? Progress and prospects. In M. Fischer (Ed.), 10 years after Dayton: Peacebuilding and civil society in Bosnia and Herzegovina (pp. 125–140). Berlin: Lit.Google Scholar
  46. Stubbs, P. (2001). ‘Social sector’ or the diminution of social policy? Regulating welfare regimes in contemporary Bosnia-Herzegovina. In Open Society Fund BiH (Ed.), International support policies to SEE-countries—Lessons (not) learned in Bosnia-Herzegovina (pp. 95–107). Sarajevo: Open Society Fund.Google Scholar
  47. TACSO (Technical Assistance for Civil Society Organizations). (2010, January 4). Bosnia & Herzegovina: Needs assessment report. Sarajevo: TACSO.Google Scholar
  48. Tisne, M., & Smilov, D. (2004). From the ground up: Assessing the record of anticorruption assistance in southeastern Europe. Budapest: Center for Policy Studies/Central European University.Google Scholar
  49. Toal, G., & Dahlman, C. T. (2011). Bosnia-Herzegovina remade: Ethnic cleansing and its reversal. Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. UNDP (United Nations Development Programme). (2007). The silent majority speaks: Snapshots of today and visions of the future of Bosnia-Herzegovina. Sarajevo: UNDP.Google Scholar
  51. Uslaner, E. M. (2004). Trust and corruption. In J. Graf, M. Taube, & M. Schramm (Eds.), Corruption and the new institutional economics (pp. 76–92). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  52. Varshney, A. (2002). Ethnic conflict and civic life: Hindus and Muslims in India. New Heaven and London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  53. Venice Commission. (2005, March 11). Opinion on the constitutional situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the powers of the high representative. CDL-AD (2005) 004. www.venice.coe.int/docs/2005/CDL-AD(2005)004-e.pdf.
  54. Vogel, B. (2016). Civil society capture: Top-down interventions from below? Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding, 10(4), 472–489.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Yakinthou, C. (2018). Fighting windmills, ignoring dragons: International assistance to civil society in post-conflict Bosnia-Herzegovina. In P. Arthur & C. Yakinthou (Eds.), Transitional justice, international assistance, and civil society (pp. 52–85). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Žeravčić, G. (2008). Analysis of institutional cooperation between governmental and non-governmental sectors in BiH. Sarajevo: Kronauer Consulting.Google Scholar
  57. Žeravčić, G., & Biščević, E. (2009). Analysis of the civil society situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Sarjevo: HTSPE Ltd. UK & Kronauer Consulting.Google Scholar
  58. Živanović, M. (2006). Civil society in Bosnia and Herzegovina: Lost in transition. In W. Benedek (Ed.), Civil society and good governance in societies in transition (pp. 23–53). Belgrade: Centre for Human Rights.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Sociology and Social ResearchUniversity of TrentoTrentoItaly

Personalised recommendations