Bosnian Diaspora in the United States

Ethnic Solidarities, Networks, and the Diasporic Imaginary: The Case of “Old” and “New” Bosnian Diaspora in the United States

by Maja Savić-Bojanić and Jana Jevtić (both Sarajevo School of Science and Technology)

Abstract This ethnographic study examines ethnic solidarities, networks and the diasporic imaginary of Bosnians who settled in the United States up until the early 2000s. While the elders cling on to the “old” pre-existing narratives of belonging as shaped by one’s ethno-religious identity, we argue that many diasporic youths have a “new” Americanized perspective on what it means to be Bosnian abroad. They not only question the symbolic value of ethnicity, but also the importance of country-of-origin background, on the one hand, and ties with their “co-ethnics”, on the other. Drawing from ethnographic fieldwork and twenty lived histories of Bosniak diaspora during their visit to Banja Luka, Tuzla and Sarajevo, this paper pushes forward a discussion on ethnic solidarities that goes beyond the considerations of Dayton- imposed identity formation, questioning how post-war affiliations are informed by ethnic attitudes in young adults living abroad.It contributes to existing discussions on transnational spaces, connections and practices, by showing that both time and space of one’s settlement greatly shape the identities of what we define as the “old” and the “new” Bosnian diaspora. Keywords: ethnic solidarities, diasporic imaginary, Bosnians, Bosnian diaspora, networks, generations, ethnicity.

The war in Bosnia and Herzegovina generated on the misplaced masculinities experienced by large migration flows. It is estimated that approx- middle-aged, professional, educated fathers imately 1.2 million people left the country as a who had fled Bosnia during the 1990s, Jansen result of the 1992-1995 conflict. This, coupled (2008) refers to “non-transnational Bosnian with two additional periods or stages of migra- refugees”, pointing to the importance of “spe- tion – during the 1960s and 1970s, when tens of cific remembered localized life practices”, and thousands of Bosnian guest workers migrated not merely country-to-country relations (p. 181). to western European countries; and the current, The author explains that these men often cling to post-war migration – resulted in 1.4 million Bos- their remembered personhood, located in places nians, or 38 per cent of the Bosnian population, where they recalled “having counted as some- living outside Bosnia (Valenta and Ramet 2011: one”. Hence, as Halilovich (2013) shows in his 1). Whereas scholars in varying fields have dis- study of “places of pain”, for Bosnian refugees, a cussed, directly or indirectly, migration and refu- major issue has been not only a change of place gee-related issues (Bieber 2006; Eastmond 2006; but also other, no less dramatic changes, includ- Williams 2006; Jakobsen 2011; Halilovich 2012), ing loss of status and misplacement of gender one question that re-emerges is the extent to relationships within refugee families. which Bosnians living in countries of settlement Writing about the meanings of home in the can be considered a “diaspora”. In his research lives of Bosnian refugees, Huttunen (2005) is sim-

NEW DIVERSITIES Vol. 21, No. 1, 2019 ISSN-Print 2199-8108 ▪ ISSN-Internet 2199-8116 NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019 Maja Savić-Bojanić and Jana Jevtić

ilarly reluctant to speak about an actual diaspora. multicultural, ethnically diverse countries in the The author refers instead to “a hesitant diaspora” world. We argue that elderly Bosnians – those because of “the refugees’ hesitation between in their late fifties and sixties – typically cling on their country of origin and their new country to the “old” pre-existing narratives of belonging of settlement as their ‘homes’ in changing situ- as shaped by one’s ethno-religious identity, and ations” (p. 177). Through careful reading of life try to accommodate these narratives in their stories written by two refugees, both of Bos- daily lives in the United States. Young Bosnians – niak1 origin, Huttunen highlights these dynamic those in their twenties and thirties – meanwhile, processes of negotiating belonging in diasporic have a “new”, Americanized perspective on their situations. She notes that “becoming a refugee diasporic identities and thus resist, reject, and is a final step in the gradual process whereby […] render irrelevant the narratives of belonging as home turns into a hostile and threatening place” articulated by their elders. (p. 188). What makes a home lose its essential characteristics like security and togetherness Literature Review cannot be explained through the trivialised and In their research on Bosnian and Hungarian oversimplified theory of “ancient ethnic hatred”, migrants’ experiences of belonging in Australia, according to which violence is pre-programmed Voloder and Andits (2016) argue that focus on into Balkan societies since the dawn of human- ethnicity in a multicultural context works to “cre- kind and erupts, with eerie regularity, for irratio- ate dominant stereotypes, wherein the cultures nal and inexplicable reasons. Rather, as Huttunen of immigrant communities are essentialised, suggests, violence is brought to ethnically mixed reified and bounded as belonging to a discrete, communities by politicised discourses which homogeneous group” (305). Bosnian migrants interpret the language of ethnicity in “extremely who generally experience less discrimination […] exclusive ways” (2005: 191). When home when compared with non-European migrant becomes politicised in ethnic terms, it also groups (Colic-Peisker 2005; Valenta and Ramet becomes problematicised as a home. 2011) seek to challenge stereotypes by negotiat- Be that as it may, as theorising on diasporas ing “a sense of belonging [that] involves intersect- indicates, many groups retain both symbolic and ing process of identifying with specific notions of practical relationships to their country of ori- culture and culturedness, while disidentifying gin, often regarded as the “true” home (Safran with others” (Voloder and Andits 2016: 313). To 1991; Wahlbeck 1999). The role of ethnicity is be a member of a “cultured” ethnic community important in this regard because “in exile, eth- thus means to negate association with commu- nicity becomes a compelling discourse for talking nism and ethnic nationalism, to distance oneself about identity in a new way” (Huttunen 2005: from association with the Balkans and war, and 188). Ethnicity makes possible talking about links align oneself with notions of democracy, multi- to home while living abroad. Showing “who we culturalism, classic education as well as middle are” and “where we come from” is also a com- or high class symbols and identities. Important mon practice within national frameworks of mul- to note here is that, once transplanted, ethnicity, ticulturalism, in which ethnic communities are along with ethnic culture and ethnic life, evolves invited to share their “culture” with the broader separately from that of the homeland. community. In what follows, we provide an eth- Flanagan (2010) shows that in addition to nographic account of ethnicity as experienced being moulded by multicultural frameworks of and enacted by two generations of Bosnians the host society, ethnicity is shaped by genera- who settled in the United States, one of the most tional changes, as each new generation further modifies its heritage “according to what is use- 1 Bosniak – Bosnian Muslim. ful or adaptable from old beliefs, style, and cus-

72 Ethnic Solidarities, Networks, and the Diasporic Imaginary NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019

toms” (p. 121). There is, however, dispute over clearer when “we note that the ‘new’ […] comes the magnitudes of the tendency for each genera- with globalisation and hypermobility, it comes tion to modify the content of its ethnic identity. with modern means of communication already These endless adaptations are seen as a basic fully formed or in the making” (p. 3). Unlike the feature of the ethnic phenomenon, although earlier diaspora where imagination was triggered they can be construed as types of ethnic adap- by a photograph or a song, the “new” diaspora tions, particularly observed in the United States, can easily contain their homeland in one’s bed- and as a gradual weakening of ethnicity. Stein room in a city such as Vancouver, Sacramento and Hill, meanwhile, argue that the contem- or Perth – “in short, networking now takes over porary version of ethnicity, where people may from the imaginary” (ibid). But even with the selectively retain what they like of the old coun- “new” diaspora, this is only a part of the story. try’s culture and discard the rest is “dime-store “The Afghan refugee to Australia or the Fiji-Indian ethnicity” and very different than earlier forms of who is illegally ensconced in Vancouver is neither ethnic solidarity attributed to the immigrant gen- global nor […] mobile” (Mishra 2007: 4). eration itself (1977: 22-23). Furthermore, Stein- Against the backdrop of these diasporic dif- berg (1981) states that different generations of ferences, Mishra explores somewhat confused migrants typically do very little together and that attempts to answer the question “where are you the symbolic value of ethnicity is not enough to from?”. He puts forth the example of the Indian ensure the continuation of solidarity. His conclu- Muslim community in Bombay, which had got- sion is based in part on the idea that the tradition ten increasingly ambivalent since the partition of of ethnic pluralism in the United States was built India in 1947, in order to demonstrate that the on systematic inequalities that existed among answer used to imply the beginning of inclusion different immigrant groups. Waters (1994) adds in a community. Now, however, it is shadowed by to this argument, and notes that there are three another question – “what do we do with them?”. types of identities evident among the second This underlying question is what Mishra calls an generation black immigrants in New York City – a “interrogative dominant” in the cultural logic of black American identity, an ethnic or hyphenated diaspora, because “the diasporic imaginary is national origin identity, and an immigrant iden- so crucially connected to the idea of a ‘homing tity. These different identities are, as the author desire’, the idea that against one’s […] home explains, “related to different perceptions and country, the present locality is […] another coun- understandings of race relations and of opportu- try” (2007: 5). Behind the use of “home country” nities in the United States” (1994: 795) and often are ethnic doctrines based on exclusivity and vary from identities as expressed by the first gen- purity, and linked very often to a religiously com- eration. munal solidarity of the ethnie, which ignores that The centrality of context is also highlighted by the homelands of diasporas are themselves “con- Koinova (2017), who links it to diaspora mobilisa- taminated […] and are not pure, unified spaces in tions, and Korac (2013), who sees it as key when the first place” (ibid). focusing on agency of the people in migratory While Mishra looks at the salience of reli- processes. In turn, this “helps to explain spe- giously based communal solidarity of the eth- cific migratory processes unfolding at a particu- nie, Nielsen (1985) considers the role of class, lar point in time and linking particular locations” and notes that “ethnic boundaries coincide with (Korac 2013: 228). The separation between the lines of structural differentiation” (133). Where “old” and the “new” diasporas thus reflects the the stratification system links ethnic identity and very different conditions that produced them. economic status, it also bestows a meaning to As Mishra (2007) explains in his research on the ethnic identity that endures so long as this con- Indian diaspora, the separation becomes even nection between status and ascriptive stigma

73 NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019 Maja Savić-Bojanić and Jana Jevtić

remains. Hereby, “ethnic solidarity is reinforced strong intergenerational conflicts and competi- by the perceived exploitation of the subordi- tion in terms of divergent political agendas, exist- nate group by the superordinate” (Nielsen 1985: ing hierarchical structures create conditions for 133). According to Flanagan, ethnic and minor- intergenerational dependency between “those ity-majority group processes “need to be kept who dominate the institutions of the traditional analytically distinct, as cultural and political -cat ethnic community and those who have the tools egories, respectively” (2010: 121). He does sug- to create new bridges into mainstream society” gest, however, that the theme of having suffered (ibid). What remains unanswered is how inter- together through injustice at some point in the generational dependency constructs a sense of past has proven to be “one of the most cohesive ethnic solidarity in a community fragmented by themes in preserving strong feelings of ethnic- so many competing interests. As Chung shows, ity in subsequent generations” (ibid). Much of political agendas of the second generation do an ethnic group’s vitality may lie in its political not necessarily accommodate easily to immi- struggles, “but the expression of its ethnicity is grant power structures. “[They] bring American- a cultural celebration of such themes – which, ised ideas about the ethnic community and its conceivably, may grow in symbolic importance place within mainstream society that clash with over generations of retelling” (ibid). How these the traditional ideologies and value systems of struggles intertwine with policy-making and the immigrant elite to varying degree” (2007: 21). institutional practice has been explored by East- Our aim in this paper is to push forth the dis- mond (2010), who looks at the role and chang- cussion on ethnicity in general and ethnic solidar- ing meanings of trauma against the backdrop of ity, networks and imaginary in particular in the Sweden’s admission of Bosnian refugees in the context of several contingent criteria that shape early 1990s, and Koinova and Karabegović (2017), the experiences of the “old” and the “new” Bos- who explore the role of diaspora in initiatives to nian diaspora. The “old” hereby refers not only to memorialize atrocities committed at the former those who emerged “before the world was thor- Omarska concentration camp in Bosnia and Her- oughly consolidated as transnational” (Spivak zegovina (hereafter BiH). 1996: 245), but also those who had settled in Chung (2007) also explores the links between the United States having fled the 1992-1995 transnational diaspora mobilisation, symbolic war. The “new” diaspora, meanwhile, encom- politics, and minority-majority group processes. passes those who arrived since the early 2000s. She notes that “detachment from mainstream Though related, these two groups are drastically society contributes to the formation of a male- different when it comes to the making of their dominated elite that is able to manipulate the diasporic identities. Generational differences, as political agendas and resources of the self-gov- we will see later, stem from historical conditions erning ethnic community” (15). These internal that can be traced back to the homeland – the hierarchies pass their legacy onto the next gen- shared Yugoslav legacy, on the one hand, and the eration of ethnic leadership in a contradictory memories of the 1992-1995 war, on the other. In manner. The author shows that a new genera- order to fully understand how homeland con- tion of political leadership, with more American- ditions shape the making of the “old” and the ized perspectives, is constrained by “the hierar- “new” Bosnian diaspora, we examine the time chical structures of the immigrant community and the space variable or, better put, the period and their relations with first-generation- pow in which our participants arrived to the United erholders who are better equipped to mobilise States and the presence of associative diaspora financial capital, ethnic-based networks of sup- networks which act as a main source of cohesion port, and other resources within the immigrant- and solidarity for all three major ethnic groups dominated enclave” (2007: 21). Hence, despite from Bosnia and Herzegovina. We examine the

74 Ethnic Solidarities, Networks, and the Diasporic Imaginary NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019

role of these two factors in the lives of Bosnians ten members of the Bosnian diaspora associa- in the United States and their negotiation of tions in the United States and ten Bosnians who belonging. do not belong to official associations but view In what follows, our discussion goes beyond themselves as members of the Bosnian diaspo- the considerations of Dayton-imposed identity ra.4 making and questions of how post-war affilia- Pseudonym Age Occupation City of Origin/ tions are informed by ethnic attitudes in both old Current City and young Bosnians living abroad. We look at, on Sakib 61 Retiree Sarajevo/ the one hand, elderly Bosnians who, as Jansen Atlanta also recognises, cling onto what they had left Sanela 60 Housewife Sarajevo/ behind, and, on the other hand, young Bosnians Atlanta who perceive their homeland as a physical home Mahira 57 Shop Assistant Banja Luka/ only, a place of tradition and family, and use Saint Louis this as a base for the making of new identities Dragan 60 Construction Tešanj/ Worker Atlanta in the wake of post-Dayton social and economic Amila 36 Medical Sarajevo/ ills. Therefore, while both groups wish to belong Doctor Saint Louis to the host society, their embodied experiences, Indira 32 University Tuzla/ feelings, and identities need to be examined with Professor Akron attention to the sense of ethic solidarity and nos- Mido 59 Environmental Banja Luka/ talgia for Bosnia and Herzegovina. The literature Scientist Atlanta that focuses on the Bosnian diaspora shows Goran 29 Light-Show Sarajevo/ Artist Saint Louis that integration outcomes and transnational Naida 31 Accountant Sarajevo/ practices are interconnected (Eastmond 2006; Atlanta Valenta 2007; Valenta and Ramet 2011). Here, Lamija 52 Lawyer Tuzla/ we add to this exciting body of work by exploring Akron “the symbolic value of ethnicity” (Steinber 1981) Ismet 63 Gardener Sarajevo/ in the rising tensions between the “old”, pre- Akron existing and home-imposed solidarities, and the Vasvija 60 Waitress Sarajevo/ Akron “new”, Americanised perspectives of those indi- Nikolina 25 Master Banja Luka/ viduals who are “lost to the group”, i.e., who do student Saint Louis not maintain ties with co-ethnics, do not belong Nermina 31 PhD Student Sarajevo/ to ethnic clubs and associations, do not consider and Translator Akron their country-of-origin background meaningful, Mario 43 Dentist Sarajevo/ etc. Atlanta Damir 28 Student Tuzla/ Methodology Atlanta The present study draws from an ethnographic research conducted by the authors from June First, we engaged in ethnographic fieldwork that until September 2016.2 A portion of what we included two trips of different length (between present is data gathered during interviews3 with two and three days) to Banja Luka (for the summer gathering of Bosnian diaspora from the 2 Table 1 below provides detailed information about each participant. per. The age of each participant is added in the brack- 3 Direct quotations from 15 interviews were used ets following the first mention of respondent’s name. throughout the paper. The authors did not quote ev- 4 The names used in this study are not respondents’ ery single respondent, but their responses were used real names, but pseudonyms which we created for to form wider observations as will be noted in the pa- the purposes of this work.

75 NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019 Maja Savić-Bojanić and Jana Jevtić

United States) and Tuzla (for a set of interviews How Time and Space of Arrival Influence the while our interviewees were on vacation). Sec- Divisions between the “Old” and the “New” ond, we interviewed participants who were visit- Bosnian Diaspora: Ethnic Solidarities as ing their families in Sarajevo. All interviews were Influenced by Post-Dayton Politics done by the authors in English or Bosnian/Croa- Sakib (61) arrived to Utica in early summer of tian/Serbian. More general conclusions were 1992. He first fled to Croatia with a humanitar- drawn from the combination of qualitative field ian convoy and then to the United States. The research and a wider literature reviews on the entire family moved at once, a story not typi- Bosnian diaspora. cal of other respondents in this research, where We are aware of our biases as we spent the fathers and boys of age stayed behind. “I thought entire time working with Bosnians who live in we would come back. The idea of going further the predominantly urban areas of the United away from Croatia was not appealing to us, but States thus forming networks with the urban when a friend from Utica invited us to stay at his population. We also categorized the participants home until the end of the war, I agreed. I agreed according to the time that they arrived to the because he also promised a job as a waiter in the United States, the reasons they cited for their association of our diaspora…I was a high school arrival, and the relationship they have with their professor back home, but this did not matter. homeland. We did not take into account the eth- The prospect of working, even as a waiter, in the nic backgrounds of our participants, although midst of the chaos was very attractive…”. His wife, they did emerge during all of the interviews and Sanela (60) readily jumps in: “Yes, I immediately were mentioned by the interviewees themselves. said we will save the money for plane tickets to Lastly, we wish to state that this work should not return directly to Sarajevo”. These words expose be taken as an archetype of the Bosnian dias- the general spirit among Bosnian refugees in the pora experience. Rather, by relying on various early 1990s who today form a vibrant Bosnian life histories we aimed to highlight a plethora of diaspora on the American East Coast – the plan experiences, memories and identities that help to return after the conflict was an overwhelm- research a diasporic community that some have ing thought for predominantly then-young fami- labelled as hesitant, detached and unconsituted lies with one or more children. “I said to Sakib: (Huttunen 2005; Jansen 2008). ‘we will be fine, we will join our people, it won’t In the following sections, the lived histories be too much different and he told you that you recounted will be used to explore the diasporic will work in his restaurant. It will not be for- imaginary of Bosnians who settled in the United ever”. Such statements nicely portray Nielsen’s States until early 2000s. More precisely, we use thoughts on ethnic solidarity as strongly linked the “old” vs. “new” members discourse to por- to “exploitation of the subordinate group by the tray the difference that exist between the pre- superordinate” (1985: 133). In the case of Sakib’s existing narratives of belonging, as intrinsically family, this type of relationship with the already linked to ethno-religious identity, and the “new” existing Bosnian community in a foreign land was Americanized perspective on what it means to a deciding factor for their American future. Yet, be Bosnian abroad. In exploring such diametrical a large majority of the Bosnian diaspora in the interpretations, this article advances the existing United States remained on after the end of the findings by demonstrating that both time and war, thus forming a diaspora. The reasons cited space of one’s settlement abroad largely shape by seven families that we interviewed were all the identity discourse of what we define as “old” the same: prospects of living in a normal country and the “new” Bosnian diaspora. yet among their own people, expressions used by all our interviewees, were much more attractive than returning to damaged homes were “all

76 Ethnic Solidarities, Networks, and the Diasporic Imaginary NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019

money earned would have been spent on recon- be an outsider and I would probably feel more structing a house and then sitting in it without a American than Bosnian, because I have adopted job, but even worse, a friend to sip coffee with”, certain American ‘ways’”. Dragan (60) is a con- as Sakib puts it. struction worker in Atlanta and expresses his Despite the fact that, for many Bosnian refu- identification with Bosnia in a similar way: “I am gees, the United States was initially considered Bosnian and one day my wish is to return. How- a temporary place of residence until they were ever, I am very cautious of this. Whenever I travel able to return to their homes in Bosnia and Her- to Bosnia I see the despair of my friends and zegovina, all of the ten interviewees who arrived family who are still there. I mostly see new faces. to the United States until 1995 remained. Each Sometimes I pass through my town of Tešanj and story they recounted5 exposes the disillusion- see nobody I know. I know, if I ever return, that ment with post-war development of BiH – the I would not count as somebody who has skill intention to return coupled with uncertainties and knowledge. I would not be able to practice of “yet another new life” in a highly fragmented law as I did during Tito’s times. I would simply country and “new neighbours at old homes” not count…” These stories portray the label of resulted in a decision to stay. Consequently, middle-aged fathers that Jansen (2008) attach to these transplanted lives, along with traditional experienced-middle aged professionals who fled ethnic life, including ethnic divisions at home Bosnian towns during the 1990s. What attaches and as remembered from the past characterize them to their homeland is not merely a relation- this group of respondents. In such constellations, ship with their country, but the remembered and the concept of “return” is linked with home and localized life practices, which translate into tem- identity left behind, a way to speak of home while porary nostalgia whereby they felt important in living abroad (Huttunen, 2005, Halilovich, 2013) pre-war BiH. Still, they are attached to the old and a means of connecting past experiences and home, since the place where they recalled hav- identities with new (post-Dayton) socio-political ing counted as someone is not present-day BiH. contexts. Consequently, the respondents who arrived as This reflection of conditioned return, depen- refugees began to view their temporary place dent solely on homeland’s socio-economic devel- of residence as a permanent home. Solidarity, in opment is captured by Mahira (57), a seller at a this context, has thus become the one relating local baker’s shop in Saint Louis. “I really wanted to one’s own ethnicity away from the homeland. to return to Sarajevo. After more than twenty For those described as the middle-aged fathers years of living in America I still don’t feel like I of Bosnia, home, and consequently the return to belong here. Americans point to my ‘Russian’ home, has lost its traditional form of attachment; accent as they call it, so, how can I feel Ameri- it has become problematic due to missing ethnic can? Yes, I have an American passport, my son togetherness and security. can hardly speak Bosnian, but I am not Ameri- Contrary to middle-aged Bosnians who arrived can. I am Bosnian with all my heart and I really to the United States during the 1992-1995 war, don’t want to be American. But, if I returned to younger Bosnians who moved here in the early Sarajevo it would be even worse. I don’t know 2000s and onwards, share a different story. “I was the people living in my old building; they have all a doctor in Bosnia. I had a decent job, relatively arrived from somewhere else. I feel like I would well-paid, but I could not really stand the uncer- tainty, the fact that sometimes I would cramp and 5 Stories of disillusionment with post-war develop- wait for the first Monday of the month and stare ment of BiH, new neighborhoods and friends and fi- at my phone for a whole day expecting a mes- nancial uncertainties were mentioned in all 20 interviewees as ultimately linked with current conditions sage from the bank that my salary has arrived. in BiH and as factors which stop their return. I would live for days on just a few dollars, because

77 NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019 Maja Savić-Bojanić and Jana Jevtić

our salaries serve only to get you through the my parents. Maybe you found a wrong person for month…literally. And bear in mind that I was a your interview, but what classifies me as a Bos- doctor”, says Amila (36), a single female from nian is only my passport and nothing else” says Tuzla. For her, a decision to move to the United Indira. States was a “natural inclination since the end of Just as Huttunen (2005) suggests, it is not the student days”, a life-long wish for a better life in, ancient hatred narrative per se that discour- again, “a normal country”. Similar to her is Indira ages these young people to feel almost com- (32), who just recently married to an American. plete detachment from their own diasporic “I moved here when I was eighteen, to study. community. Instead, the politicized discourses I wanted to experience life in a normal country, to that characterize the nature of ethnic solidar- study and then to remain in the United States in ity among diasporic groups create a sense of order to work. I think I did well,” she states with non-belonging among young cohorts of newly a smile. Today, Indira holds a PhD in sociology arrived professional immigrants who not only and has just started teaching at a large state uni- push forward the discourse on ethnic solidarity versity. Both Amila and Indira are very hesitant beyond its traditional forms, but problematized about returning to Bosnia. “Yes, I was somebody home as the source of ethnic grievances. This there, but I am much better here. I don’t feel mis- “dime-store ethnicity” (Stein and Hill, 1997 cited placed; I feel exactly in place. I think about my in Flanagan 2010: 121), whereby members of a parents in Sarajevo, but I earn enough to be able diasporic community upkeep the selected norms to visit. However, I prefer that they visit me, as and values of the homeland and discard the rest, they enjoy it here as much as I do.” Indira thinks is very typical for all the interviewees. Alterna- in similar terms: “Home is where my parents tively, ethnic grievances that permeate all three are. If they are here, here is home. I feel totally ethnic groups representing Bosnian diaspora in detached from Bosnia. In fact, Bosnia has never the United States, contribute to the situation given me anything. The US gave me everything – in which ethnic solidarity is conditioned upon good education, a well-paid job, a total sense of the politics of the homeland, that is, as several having control over what I do. This, I am positive, young respondents point “politicization of eth- would not have been the case in Bosnia. And no, nicity and consequently ethnic discourse, which I will not return”. Al-Ali (2001: 582) claims that undermines the value of ethnicity”. Hence, the there is evidence that the immersion into a new continuation of ethnic solidarity, just as Mishra life in the country of residence is accompanied by (2007) points in his work, the one brought from increasing links with the home country through home, is not ensured. the exchange of ideas and knowledge, regular The time and space of arrival of “old” and contact and visit and involvement in community “new” diasporic communities cuts across these associations, but these statements do not hold drastically perceived differences between them. entirely true for Bosnians living in the United The symbolic meaning of “return” which mani- States, notably the younger generations who feel fests as a desire, but the one that is inevitably almost entirely detached. “I don’t want to join an linked to ethnic belonging and identity, is the association. The idea of gathering and listening most observable trait of Bosnian refugees who, to Bosnian singers, mainly those who come to today, are American citizens and whose children sing for masses of homesick Bosnians who have have limited attachment to their ethnic cultures. been in here for decades is sickening to me. Plus, Yet, the fact that they came to the United States what association to join? They are all ‘ethnically with the desire to return translates into a linger- charged’ and their activities focus only on ethnic ing and omnipresent feeling to actually do so talks. It’s like being stuck in time, being in Bosnia “once the day comes”. What is obvious is that in the early 1990s. I visit home, but only to see the actual time of arrival, the days of the bloody

78 Ethnic Solidarities, Networks, and the Diasporic Imaginary NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019

war in their homeland, represent the symbol of among the diaspora members who arrived dur- their desire to return – they left without wanting ing the war is cited as the primary reason for not to leave and dwelled in a “limbo, being caught being able to return. Building upon Huttunen’s between their wish to return, unfavourable cir- argument that home loses its essential charac- cumstances in BiH and the difficulties of starting a teristics like togetherness and security when new life in their country of residence” (Al-Ali et al. politics interpret ethnicities in “extremely exclu- 2001: 582). Conversely, the young Bosnian dias- sive ways” (Huttunen 2005: 191), our research pora, present-day citizens of BiH, live an entirely extends this discourse by revealing that the over- different story, the one that has little to do with whelming detachment from what can be consid- the war, but with post-conflict socio-political and ered home and people from home is a by-prod- economic development of their homeland. Their uct of homeland’s policies towards its diasporic time of arrival indicates different desires, feel- groups. Hence, it is also the transnational forms ings and denotes even newly emerging identities, of solidarity that impact diasporic political and which are more connected to their new home cultural consciousness. than the one they left behind. The formation Conversely, our respondents who arrived after of very different attitudes towards ethnic home 2000 were even harsher when it came to blam- and ethnic group that emerge between the old ing the current political set-up for their immigra- and the new members of Bosnian diaspora in the tion to a foreign land. More precisely, all ten of United States contribute to a new form of diver- those interviewed from this group referred to sity that can be observed within this migrant inadequacies of the current system and cited it community. as the crucial factor for not wanting to return. In Another interesting aspect that emerged from fact, the consequences of “such a carless policy the interview data was a shared perception that towards the young and educated Bosnian popula- the current socio-political set-up in Bosnia and tion”, as Goran (29), a light-show artist from Sara- Herzegovina is guilty for not creating favour- jevo claims, is the primary reason why all of the able grounds for the old diaspora to return and respondents from this age group feel “shame”, for the new one to emerge. “If they were smart “hesitation”, “detachment”, and “unwillingness” enough (the government) they would be able to return to Bosnia and Herzegovina. The rapidly to see that we have so much to offer to them in changing identity that they claim to experience terms of improving the ways the society works, in is “a result of a complete lack of care towards the terms of knowledge that our children who were young on behalf of the Bosnian government”, in educated in the United States have to offer, but the words of Goran. “My friends are all American, most importantly the connections that we are I have no problem with the American way of life, able to create” says Mido (59), an environmental the long hours and little fun” says Naida (31), a scientist from Atlanta. “Politicians in Bosnia cur- young accountant from Sarajevo who is currently rently invest little effort in communicating with working at Ernst and Young Company. “In Bosnia, their diaspora. Yes, I would return. In fact, I long I would never have the opportunities that I have to return. I have the money, a house in Bosnia, here and I blame my government for it”, she con- but what would I do there?” he says adding that cludes. Hence the political context of the home whenever he visits Bosnia his friends tell him country emerges as a significant factor in detach- “not to be stupid and return, because nobody ing both the “old” and the “new” Bosnian dias- would care what he has to offer in terms of skills, pora from transnational social spaces. knowledge and experience. When I think about When used in a discourse of ethnic solidarity, it, they are right. And that’s not my fault; it’s the the time and space variables create interesting fault of Bosnian politicians”. The overwhelming symbolic characteristics of the Bosnian diaspora feeling of “not being counted as a somebody” in the United States, which are strongly inter-

79 NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019 Maja Savić-Bojanić and Jana Jevtić

twined with the identity discourse. The attach- ent form and practiced activities, contribute to ment to the old identity, which is a product of the making of a single Bosnian diasporic identity a shared Yugoslav past, among the older gen- or still challenge the concept of Bosnian dia- erations of Bosnian diaspora is contrary to the sporic community. Further, we unravel whether rapidly altering identity observable among the these activities, no matter how strong or weak young, post-Dayton generation. Older Bosnians6 they are, contribute to solidarity among Bosnian have a much clearer picture of what is home, yet diaspora. Flanagan (2010: 121) argues that eth- they have difficulty returning because of what nic culture and life occur separately from that of they once called home and what they identified the home; this change emerges out of genera- as home has disappeared. In that sense, the old tional modifications of heritage, which members identities remain and seem to be a product of of diasporic communities view as useful or adapt- nostalgia rather than ethnic solidarity tied to a able to new social spaces. The empirical research real need to return. The “homing desire” (Mishra, which underpins this work has identified that the 2007: 5) is, thus, the predominant ‘diasporic primary premise on which Bosnian associative imaginary’ of the older cohorts of our respon- diasporic networks in the United States build its dents. Contrary to this is the feeling of the young solidarity through social places is embedded in who do not have a strong sense of belonging the cultural reproduction, or preservation of tra- to their homeland, despite the fact that they ditional, everyday, routinized activities and prac- have arrived to the United States very recently. tices, which depict family hierarchies and gender For them, a new identity is a normal derivative relations and assert belonging to a community. of socially and economically induced migration; Lamija (52) declares herself as a Bosnian it represents freedom of expression as it offers refugee, accentuating also that she is a Muslim. choice. The newly acquired benefits that they Despite the fact that the war is long over, she still gained from their diasporic experiences in the sees herself as wartime migrant, something that United States are translated into an easy acqui- is making her “entirely different from the Ameri- sition of a new and presumably more American can people”. She says: “The only place where I identity. Thus, despite the fact that the “old” and can enjoy myself is the udruženje (association). the “new” respondents do not share the ‘dia- I go there for coffee, to speak Bosnian, I feel at sporic imaginary’ induced by the time variable, home there. My favourite time of the year is they both blame the current political context for when udruženje manages to bring over Bosnian either inability or unwillingness to return. singers, so we then can sing our favourite folk songs. We usually do this during Eid holidays and Associative Diasporic Networks as a Social we also have lamb, baklava …” She readily con- Place of Solidarity: Makers and Breakers of tinues to show that her udruženje is not a place Bosnian Diasporic Identities where Serbs and Croats meet, even though they In the previous section, we introduced the time might be from Bosnia: “no, only we7 meet here”. and space contexts which, as we have demon- Ismet (63), a gardener from Atlanta also speaks strated, largely differentiate between identities about Eid holidays as his favorite time of the and solidarities as exhibited by the “old” and year in udruženje. “I am a Yugoslav, before the the “new” Bosnian diaspora in the United States. war this is how I declared myself, but I cannot Now we ask how these formulations extend to deny that I enjoy our music during Eid holidays encompass the existence of associative diasporic which I celebrate only in udruženje and not at networks or, better, whether they, in their pres- home. My wife and I come here, our kids don’t

6 Those who arrived to the United States in the pe- 7 Bosnian Muslims, but she does not call them Bos- riod from 1992-1995. niak.

80 Ethnic Solidarities, Networks, and the Diasporic Imaginary NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019

care.” He goes on about declaring that he sees amongst Bosnians who immigrated to the United the association as “a keeper of Bosnian tradition, States as refugees continue to challenge the con- but mainly Muslim. We sing sevdalinka8 here, cept of a single and strong concept of solidarity drink our coffee, we eat food from back home. among members of a diasporic community. We have a good time; it makes us feel secure and But, the severance between the us Bosnians close to each other”. His wife Vasvija (60) con- and other Bosnians (Serbs or Croats) is not so tinues: “I was also a Yugoslav, but I don’t mind blatantly avoided in large Bosnian diasporic com- that we preserve mainly Bosniak tradition. I am munities, such as those in Saint Louis and Atlanta. also a Muslim, but I would say a very secular one. What is more, the overreliance on ethnic differ- What matters to me here is that we are able to ences appears a distinct feature of these dia- stick together and try to teach our children about sporic associations, insomuch pronounced as the their homeland. It’s fun, it doesn’t matter to me post-war nuances in some of the most divided whether it is Muslim or Serb music. We sing areas in Bosnia and Herzegovina. In fact, the sep- everything” she adds. “I would just like that the arations that exist in their homeland also emerge politicians in Bosnia realize the potential we have in a foreign land: “Wartime feelings are still there, here. I don’t mean us the old, but our children… especially in the older generations. Associations The politicians there don’t want to do anything are largely Bosniak, Serb or Croat and they all see about keeping those children there.” each other as the antagonizers of Yugoslav wars” All of the ten respondents who arrived to the says Nikolina, twenty-five, a master’s student in United States in early 1990s as refugees speak Saint Louis who arrived there with her parents about udruženje as a primary keeper of Bosnian9 in the last wave of refugees in 1994-1995. “I was tradition, but eight do not deny their Yugoslav made to say that I was a Serb, their parents heritage. In this constellation of super-diversity and our parents never really spoke, although (Vertovec 2007), we observed that cultural repro- we lived very close to each other. Back then it duction forms the basis for existence of social was not clear why we were prohibited to speak spaces of ethnic solidarity for the older genera- to each other. It later on crystallized in my head, tion of Bosnian diaspora in the United States. but still, I didn’t understand. Why did we have to These Bosnians tend to posit identity against tra- bring with us the hatreds we left at home? This is dition of Bosnia and Herzegovina in a Yugoslav why I avoid going to udruženje. The spark is still context – they are Muslim, they are secular, yet there”. Despite a strong presence of associative they call themselves Yugoslav and do not refer to networks, the internal antagonisms that occur the term Bosniak. This turns diasporic associative within a community from a single country of ori- networks into weak makers or, rather, breakers gin have the power to reduce solidarities within of the Bosnian diasporic community’s identity, in diasporic groups of different ethnic, but same the sense that it neither destroys the old one nor national origin. In this context, we can observe does it create a new one. Clearly, if associative the internal hierarchies (parents as ‘makers’ and diasporic networks rely upon only one premise children as ‘successors’ of home-produced eth- of ethnic solidarity, or, better, culture, then we nic identities) which undermine “Americanized cannot speak of institutional channels of trans- perspectives” (Chung 2007: 15) of the young national solidarity to transform a diasporic com- who are capable of transforming the old inter- munity into a truly harmonized community with pretations of ethnic belonging and solidarity and a strong sense of a single identity. Understood contribute to a true, diasporic transnational soli- in a broader sense, the traditional rituals, social darity of Bosnian diaspora. gatherings and personal conflicts (us vs. them) In contrast to evidence from this research, which presents the view that the “old” Bosnian 8 A traditional folk song from Bosnia. 9 In connotation with Islamic (Muslim, Bosniak). diaspora from all three ethnic groups living in the

81 NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019 Maja Savić-Bojanić and Jana Jevtić

United States represent weak bearers of ethnic party and came home within two hours.” solidarity despite their strong connections with Several other “new” diaspora respondents associative diasporic networks, an alternative pointed to the fact that they were not interested observation amongst the “new” Bosnian dias- in joining a Bosnian associative network. “They pora in the United States illustrates that they have are stuck in time, they understand very little a more transnational character. This is largely about what is going on in Bosnia and seem to lin- true if we consider that these respondents’ deci- ger on in the 1990s. That’s not progress, that’s sions to remain outside their homeland is vol- not doing things for Bosnians here and at home. untary and permanent, as demonstrated earlier. I really expected it to be different than this” says However, our respondents point out to other Nermina. None of the respondents from this reasons: “I absolutely keep contact with my fam- group seem to annunciate ethnic differences ily and friends back home. I send them money when talking about Bosnians. In fact, they came or buy them tickets to come and visit me during from more or less single-ethnic families, but winter months when I work” says Nermina (31) came to the United States without prejudice from Akron, a who is a doctoral student and a towards other groups: “We were there during part-time translator in a larger city close by. the war and the war taught us to go along with The same is true for Mario (43), a dentist from each other and to help each other whenever Atlanta, who keeps connected to his hometown possible. This is what separates us from refu- of Sarajevo. But what is important for Mario is gees that came here during the war. They under- his, what he calls, “Bosnian community service”. stand very little of it and the only image they “I don’t mean belonging to some kind of associa- have of groups in Bosnia is hate. This is what has tion. No, there are plenty here, and they seem been in their heads for the past twenty years or to do well for themselves. What I do is that each more” says Mario. Younger generations of Bos- year, starting from Thanksgiving, I start collect- nian diaspora who arrived to the United States ing money to raise funds for rural areas in Bosnia in the 2000s preserve strong family links, but and Herzegovina, for schools, farmers, education also maintain ties to different associations and and send this money through an organization non-governmental organizations in Bosnia and which than spreads it to those in need”. Mario Herzegovina. Dragan and Nermina have both does this with several other Bosnians living in worked for a Bosnian NGO based in Sarajevo Atlanta, but points out that none of them want whose aim is to gather young people who moved to engage in their associative networks in the city to the United States in order to finish university and act through them. “They see us ‘newcom- degrees and offer them a six-month internship in ers’ as crazy people who moved for fun. Once I Bosnia and Herzegovina. They have been work- went there to see how I can get involved – boy, ing with them for the past seven years and more was I disappointed! They sit around, drink cof- than 500 young students have passed through fee, music blaring in the background, really very the program. Out of this number, some 300 have self-interested and, or so it seemed to me, very remained in Bosnia in order to work. “I think our phlegmatic”. Damir (28) also agrees with the fact program is successful. We work across the States that Bosnian associative networks are beckons to find suitable candidates, we head-hunt so to of “generational and ethnic divisions who stop say, and help them get involved in their home their children from using all the opportunities country. What I noticed about returnees to the they have in America. Instead, they seem stuck US – they are mostly first generation Bosnian in 1993. For them vrh svijeta10 is to gather for immigrants whose parents fled Bosnia during the holidays, eat, drink…I went once for a New Year’s war. They return because their families are here.” Notions of solidarity among the “new” Bos- 10 Translated to English: peak of the world. This is a local slang denoting something great and exciting. nian diaspora in the United States is character-

82 Ethnic Solidarities, Networks, and the Diasporic Imaginary NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019

ized by financial remittances, important connec- isations served as repositories of symbols closely tions with institutions from BiH, no links to asso- associated with home that many Bosnians in ciative diasporic networks and no focus on eth- their fifties and sixties felt no longer belonged nic differences. Unlike the old Bosnian diaspora, to them. Here, ethnicity became a compelling younger cohorts of the “new” diaspora encour- discourse for talking about identity in a new age strong links in spite of their overwhelming way. It is through ethnicity that many older Bos- dissatisfaction with the present-day political sys- nians were able to talk about their relationship tem. They promote collective, rather than purely to Bosnia while living in the United States. The ethnic identity through social, economic, cultural home was constructed in moments of nostalgic and political actions that cautions against the remembrance and although the hope of return issues that are born out of divided ethnic back- dominated the lives of those we interviewed, grounds. Thus, the “new” Bosnian diaspora can they were acutely aware that the possibilities be termed to be the bearer of an emerging singu- of returning depend on developments both in lar Bosnian identity, one that is free of ethnic ties Bosnia and the United States. The potentials of and biases that appear to divide the older gen- life as an immigrant in American society, on the erations of Bosnians, who despite coming from a one hand, and the political and social develop- single country, prefer to remain close with their ments in Bosnia, on the other, will either open or own ethnic groups. Hence, these young cohorts close both symbolic and practical choices in the of Bosnian migrants foster and push forward the future. still relatively weak transnational solidarity which This “generational positioning” as Palmberger has long escaped different Bosnian communities (2016) terms it, explains the narrative behind the around the world. lived histories of the “old” and the “new” members of Bosnian diaspora living in the United Conclusion States. The experiences of divergent memories In this paper, we explored the experience of of the Yugoslav past, the war trauma and post- being ethnic in diaspora. Through careful read- conflict hardships mould the ways in which eth- ing of various life stories by two different genera- nicity and “being ethnic” in a diaspora is under- tions of Bosnians living in the United States, we stood, in its broader sense, by these individuals. argued that younger Bosnians – those in their By investigating personal memories, this work twenties and thirties – purposefully cast off the extended the understanding of the symbolic beliefs and customs, including ethnic affiliations, value of ethnicity under the umbrella of country- of the older generation. Hoping to assimilate of-origin background and ties with “co-ethnics” with their peers in the society, younger Bosnians by pushing forward the narrative that individual also oppose the lifestyles of their elders. Those in memories never stand alone, but form a part of their twenties and thirties do not have a strong a broader social frame which is linked to official sense of attachment to home, despite that interpretations of history (Fabian, 2007; Halb- their arrival to the United States is quite recent. wachs 1980, 1992). Hence, this “generational They forge instead what is believed to be a new identity” is determined not just by ‘what is lived’, “Americanized identity”, one that offers - oppor but how the ‘lived’ is interpreted through memo- tunities and is thus contrasted to rather limited ries and personal understandings of the past and options for thriving – economically, socially, and present. In this sense, generations are not and politically – in the home country. cannot be considered as homogenous cohorts By comparison, older Bosnians who arrived (Palmberger, 2016), but rather as bearers of gen- to the United States during the 1992-1995 war, erational identity which, in turn, decide the inter- established ethnic associations that promoted pretations linked to ethnicity and its symbolic some sense of cultural continuity. These organ- value in a diasporic setting.

83 NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019 Maja Savić-Bojanić and Jana Jevtić

References KOINOVA, M. 2018. “Diaspora Mobilisation for AL-ALI, N. et al. 2001. “Refugees and Transnation- Conflict and Post-Conflict Reconstruction: Con- alism: The Experience of Bosnians and Eritreans textual and Comparative Dimensions”.Journal of in Europe”. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Stud- Ethnic and Migration Studies 44 (8): 1-19. ies 27 (4): 615-634. KOINOVA, M. and Dž. KARABEGOVIC 2017. “Dias- BIEBER, F. 2006. Post-War Bosnia: Ethnicity, In- poras and Transitional Justice: Transnational Ac- equality and Public Sector Governance. New tivism to Build a Memorial at the Omarska Con- York: Palgrave Macmillan. centration Camp in Bosnia-Herzegovina”. Global CHUNG, A. Y. 2007. Legacies of Struggle: Conflict Networks 17 (2): 212-233. and Cooperation in Korean American Politics. KORAK, M. 2013. “Transnational Entrepreneurs: Stanford: Stanford University Press. Chinese in Serbia and Their Translocal Strategies COLIC-PEISKER, V. 2005. “’At Least You’re the Right of Betterment and Incorporation”. In: W. Kokot Colour’: Identity and Social Inclusion of Bosnian et al., eds., Diaspora as a Resource: Comparative Refugees in Australia”. Journal of Ethnic and Mi- Studies in Strategies, Networks and Urban Space, gration Studies 31 (4): 615-638. Berlin: Lit Verlag. EASTMOND, M. 2006. “Transnational Returns and MISHRA, V. 2007. The Literature of the Indian Di- Reconstruction in Post-War Bosnia and Herze- aspora: Theorizing the Diasporic Imaginary. Ox- govina”. International Migration 44 (3): 141-166. fordshire: Routledge. EASTMOND, M. 2010. “Egalitarian Ambitions, Con- NIELSEN, F. 1985. “Toward a Theory of Ethnic Soli- structions of Difference: The Paradoxes of Refu- darity in Modern Societies”. American Sociologi- gee Integration in Sweden”.Journal of Ethnic and cal Review 50 (2): 133-149. Migration Studies 37 (2): 277-295. PALMBERGER, M. 2016. How Generations Remem- FABIAN, J. 2006. The Other Revisited: Critical After- ber: Conflicting Histories and Shared Memories thoughts. Anthropological Theory (6): 139-152. in Post-War Bosnia and Herzegovina. Palgrave FLANAGAN, W. G. 2010. Urban Sociology: Images Macmillan. and Structure. (Revised Edition). Lanham: Rowan SAFRAN, W. 1991. “Diasporas in Modern Societies: and Littlefield Publishers Inc. Myths of Homeland and Return”. Diaspora 1 (1): HALBWACHS, M. 1980. The Collective Memory. 83-99. New York: Harper Colphon Books. STEIN, H. F. and R. F. HILL. 1977. The Ethnic Imper- HALBWACHS, M. 1992. On Collective Memory. ative: Examining the New White Ethnic Move- Chicago: The University of Chicago Press. ment. University Park: Pennsylvania State Uni- HALILOVICH, H. 2012. “Trans-Local Communities versity Press. in the Age of Transnationalism: Bosnians in Di- STEINBERG, S. 1981. The Ethnic Myth: Race, Eth- aspora”. International Migration 50 (1): 162-178. nicity, and Class in America. New York: Athene- HALILOVICH, H. 2013. Places of Pain: Forced Dis- um. placement, Popular Memory and Trans-Local SPIVAK, G. 1996. “Diasporas Old and New: Women Identities in Bosnian War-Torn Communities. in the Transnational World”. Textual Practice 10 New York: Berghahn Books. (2): 245-269. HUTTUNEN, L. 2005. “’Home’ and Ethnicity in the VALENTA, M. 2007. “The Daily Life and Social In- Context of War Hesitant Diasporas of Bosnian tegration of Immigrants in City and Small Town: Refugees”. European Journal of Cultural Studies Evidence from Norway”. International Journal on 8 (2): 177-195. Multicultural Societies 9 (2): 284-306. JAKOBSEN, J. 2011. “Bosnia and the Remittances- VALENTA, M. and S. P. RAMET 2011. “Bosnian Mi- Institutions-Development Nexus”. In: M. Valenta grants: An Introduction.” In: M. Valenta and S. P. and S. P. Ramet, eds., The Bosnian Diaspora: In- Ramet, eds., The Bosnian Diaspora: Integration tegration in Transnational Communities, Burling- in Transnational Communities, Burlington: Ash- ton: Ashgate. gate. JANSEN, S. 2008. “Misplaced Masculinities: Status VERTOVEC, S. 2007. “Super-Diversity and Its Impli- Loss and the Location of Gendered Subjectivities cations”. Ethnic and Racial Studies 30 (6): 1024- Amongst `Non-Transnational’ Bosnian Refugees”. 1054. Anthropological Theory 8 (2): 181-200.

84 Ethnic Solidarities, Networks, and the Diasporic Imaginary NEW DIVERSITIES 21 (1), 2019

VOLODER, L. and P. Andits. 2016. “The Value of WATERS, M. C. 1994. “Ethnic and Racial Identities Culturedness: Bosnian and Hungarian Migrants’ of Second-Generation Black Immigrants in New Experiences of Belonging in Australia”. The Aus- York City”. International Migration Review 28 (4): tralian Journal of Anthropology 27 (1): 298-316. 795-820. WAHLBECK, Ö. 1999. Kurdish Diasporas: A Com- WILLIAMS, C. R. 2006. “The Significance of Prop- parative Study of Kurdish Refugee Communities. erty Restitution to Sustainable Return in BiH”. In- London: Macmillan. ternational Migration 44 (3): 40-61.

Note on the Authors

Maja Savić-Bojanić received her Ph.D. from the University of Buckingham, and is currently teaching in the Department of Political Science and International Relations at the Sarajevo School of Science and Technology (SSST). Her research and publications focus on national minority groups and group identity issues in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Her other interests include: migrant and diaspora identities, autochthon minorities, identities and religion in fragmented states, and minority political participation. E-mail: [email protected].

Jana Jevtić received her Ph.D. in sociology and social anthropology from the Central European University (CEU) in Budapest. She teaches a course on religion, society, and politics in the Department of Political Science and International Relations at the Sarajevo School of Science and Technology (SSST). Her research and publications are in the field of social movement studies, ranging from theory to content, with emphasis on reform and protest movements in Islam. She is a visiting fellow in the Department of Anthropology at the University of California at Berkeley, where she works alongside Prof. Charles Hirschkind. E-mail: [email protected].