Descriptive Representation and Political Participation: Exploring Croatia’s Non-Dominant Groups Electoral Turnout

Agarin, T., & Cermak, P. (2020). Descriptive Representation and Political Participation: Exploring Croatia’s Non- Dominant Groups Electoral Turnout. ANALI HRVATSKOG POLITOLOŠKOG DRUŠTVA, 16(1), 49. https://doi.org/10.20901/an.16.03

Published in: ANALI HRVATSKOG POLITOLOŠKOG DRUŠTVA

Document Version: Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record

Queen's University Belfast - Research Portal: Link to publication record in Queen's University Belfast Research Portal

Publisher rights Copyright 2020 the authors. This is an open access article published under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike License (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/), which permits use, distribution and reproduction for non-commercial purposes, provided the author and source are cited and new creations are licensed under the identical terms.

General rights Copyright for the publications made accessible via the Queen's University Belfast Research Portal is retained by the author(s) and / or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing these publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights.

Take down policy The Research Portal is Queen's institutional repository that provides access to Queen's research output. Every effort has been made to ensure that content in the Research Portal does not infringe any person's rights, or applicable UK laws. If you discover content in the Research Portal that you believe breaches copyright or violates any law, please contact [email protected].

Download date:01. Oct. 2021 E U Queen's U Timofey Agarin g Poli Cr and impact analysed their on state bu- andCroats, Kosovo Bosniaks, Albanians mobilisationcal and violence by Serbs, lars have long studied ethno-politi the - over republic 'their' - from Scho Serbs. Kosovo Albanians) wrested control groups (Slovenes, Croats, Bosniaks, dominantwhen republican majority throughout conflicts ty-based the 1990s of violent aseries - experienced ethnici The region of former Yugoslavia has Introduction E C M Petr Čermák Desc -mail: [email protected] -mail: -mail: [email protected] -mail: zech Republic zech nited Kingdom Brno University, asaryk r o slavia: S volved theconstituent primarily nations ofthe Abstract intheThe ofethnicconflicts series overWestern the1990sin- Balkans Keywords Political Non-Dominant M participation, representation at national andmunicipallevels. inthecontextof identity-politics political ofhighlyethnicisedinstitutionsensuring mobilisation the reflects evidencecontinuous that importance their ethno-political groupsbilisation ofnon-dominant inregions previously affected by conflict offer dynamics ofdominantC groups inpost-conflict groups ofnon-dominant affectedfor by theethno-political politicalparticipation ethnic groups. The paperinvestigates ofethnicidentity thecontinuous importance graphic areas affected between thedominant, state-founding by defacto conflict lence has equallyaffected smaller othernumerically groups residing inthegeo conflict S conflict p ou at niversity Belfast niversity Belfast t r ic erbs, C ipt i ociety, C s elec a a 's non- l P roats, Bosniaks, andlater, Albanians andM ive Re ive roatia art t o pr icipat d ra omin esen l t motives context the set con in which - greatly,vary and but economic social tributed and to state peace building. ted inpolitics from margins the but con - minorityThese groups often - participa not play acentral role inits resolution. werewho affected the conflictby but did grantedhas been to minor groups, those conflict.the Far less attention, however, establishmentthe of of law rule the after ilding, minority accommodation and Accepted: N report scientific Preliminary D OI Reasons for participation political : 10.20901/an.16.03 ion: ex ur tat roatia. Analyses ofthepoliticalmo S a ocialist Federal of Republic Yugo n nou inorities, L ovember 2019 t ion a ion

acedonians. E p t lections, Postocal Elections, lo n r d thnic vio ing

- - - - -

49 T. Agarin, P. Čermák, Descriptive Representation and Political Participation, Anali 16 (1) 49-70 (2019) 50 Anali Hrvatskog politološkog društva 2019. lation share of other groups 4.36%),all are Serbs the largest the minority (popu- and tountry make it clear that although allows us tothe context reflect the co- of 10% of population'. a country's This group of groups the sizeis below whose one the half of next the larger minority nority groups with sizeof the 'less than Following Juon (2020),we on focus mi- Ruthenians, Slovaks and many others. including Hungarians, Roma, Czechs, ons levels with high of diversity, ethnic re conflict several - took in regi place identity preferences. onal incentives, thus, trump individual identities (McLaughlin 2007). Instituti- tant for increasing of salience the ethnic advancement,social is far more impor as offering individual opportunities for in accessties to state resources, as well tutions privileging group certain identi- int out that effect political the instiof - (Wilhelmsenparties - po 2005).Others transformation within conflicting the (Gurr 1994),or process the of identity effects their on sal change inconflict relationship identities between and cau- and Laitin 2003) and underlying the (Fearontities conflicting inthe parties onhas radicalisation the been of iden- However, of focus research primary the violence (Kalyvas 2008;Wood 2015). identity transformation during and after effects of conflict onmultidimensional to hassome focussed ct extent on the 1997). Comparative research on confli- tation of 'likes the by likes' the (Wimmer galvanise electorates to ensure represen- degree of significance and continue to identities ethnic cts, hold aparticular emerging fromsocieties violent confli- identities. ethno-political new Thus, in supportparticular emergence the of formed. and Crises violent conflict in formerly conflictinggroups have been interactionspolitical of members of temporary relationships the between We on Croatia, specifically focus whe - - criptive statistics. that illustrate data offered by our des- representatives of non-dominant groups conducted over past the five yearswith of sets the our qualitative interviews outcomes.policy Finally, we draw upon interest of citizens possible all best inthe issues, despite (presumed, the shared) upperthe hand over politicking on civic re it is clear that politicking ethnic takes dynamicsral at municipal the level- whe place.takes We- electo the discuss then context contemporary inwhich politics sation' process inCroatia by setting the present abrief outline of 'nationali the - dominant Croats and Serbs. affectedctly thetheviolence between by zones, contested territories and/or dire- for present Serbs, former inthe conflict of our study groups, ethnic is all except population (Krasniqi 2015). account for less than 1% of entire the atia (1991-1995)directly affected ma- interethnic violence. The war inCro- te setting two the groups on course for independence of Croat the nation-sta- republic'sthe population, opposed the untilwho 1991constituted about 12%of inearlyvia 1990s.However, Serbs, the calated with break-up the of Yugosla - point of mobilisation political that es- as focal the independence, crystallised vereignty, and ultimately nation-state litically mobilised Croats, national- so Since mid-1960s,for the - ethno-po the in Croatia Mobilisation Ethnopolitical 2 1

We proceed inthree steps; first we which underlie the present study. present the underlie which of all interviews, 20 more than in collected data qualitative the it with triangulating of 2003-2017 and period for the ctions ele eleven from data electoral cipal-level the muni collating research, field and sed desk-ba considerable We conducted have godine. 2011. istanova kućanstava stanovništva, Popis 2 1 The focus - - - up splits among (Škiljan them 2013). warzone, intra-gro to led which further - ir decisions to whether stay orthe flee Croatian-Serb conflict as the well - as in over position political their towards the ups were frequently internally divided dosi 1998).Furthermore, minority gro- Zupančič 2004;Kocsis and Kocsis-Ho- ter end the of war the (Klemenčič and largely fled, only partially returnto af- Hungariansthe Slavonia, inEastern groups,cal such as Ruthenians the and 2015; Rygolová 2016).Many lo- smaller Kaselj,rić Škiljan, and Vukić 2015;Pap (Szabolcs conflictparties 2012; the Pe- community, openly supported one of including Hungarian the or Czech the throughout while conflict, the others, Slovaks and Roma, the remained neutral communities local as particular of the (Trifunovska 1998).Some groups, such nic 'others' during and afterthe conflict atmosphere of intolerance towards- eth by inter-ethnic tensions and a general environment asocial faced they marred ljan, and Vukić 2008); 2015; Cocozzelli or remain neutral (Perić Kaselj, Ški- nities had to conflict sidesinthe take Croats.the non-dominant All commu- territorial claims byand both Serbs the non-dominant groups were subject to lent conflictand (Živić Pokos 2004). transitional administration afterthevio- central institutions by international the temporarily out taken of control of the remained Slavonia, inEastern area the just of half pre-war the population Serb atian offensive military in 1995, and and Western Slavonia as aresult of Cro- Serbs-controlledthe areas of Krajina The vastparties. majority Serbs fled of expulsions committed by warring both to leave homes their as a result of ethnic territory. Hundreds of thousands had comprising about 30% of Croatian the controlled by structures, rebel the Serb inly areas the claimed and temporarily During the conflict, the During areas settled by the political appearance political the of com smaller - gration into Croatian politics. However, Croatia are held up as examples of inte- and areas Czechs in rural of Central group inlarge of parts Croatia, Eastern garians that have dominant the been and Croatian reports. Similarly, Hun- violence –frequently feature inItalian Italians settling inIstria –not affected by mentioned whereas media, inthe most areain the affected by conflict are rarely munities inWestern Slavonia residing petition. For example, tiny Italian com- shadow of dominant the groups' com- communities again disappeared ina ković 2013;Gregurović 2014). 2017; Jelić, Biruški, Čorkalo and Ajdu­ remainand Serbs the limited (Čermák interactions Croats the societal between sent day and political, economic and in municipal politics well until pre the - minority Serb the has remained present the between majority flict Croats and settlement, political con ethnic partial - Despite end the of hostilities and the hno-territorial autonomy 2011). (Barić intendedpalities to consolidate et- their formin the of an association of munici- to quasi-territorial form aspecial entity Croatia inEastern Serbs were allowed tionally guaranteed 2008). (Caspersen different institutional levels was institu- and minority representation political at turn to pre-war their places of residence minorities were granted right the to re- elementary citizenBeyond rights, all groups status. some, special albeit weak, conflictultimately granted the minority (Kut 2000,1). religiousethnic, and civic identities' onalism…, but own their between also nalism… and larger the minority nati - conflicting the between majority natio- norities have not 'squeezed only been in Southern Kosovo, non-dominant mi- Similar of to case the Turks the settled In the post-conflict period, smaller smaller Inperiod, post-conflict the settlements Thepolitical final the of

51 T. Agarin, P. Čermák, Descriptive Representation and Political Participation, Anali 16 (1) 49-70 (2019) 52 Anali Hrvatskog politološkog društva 2019. that fostered of Croat ideal the the nati- nation-centred HDZtutelage inpolitics firstthe years sawof independence the Škiljan 2010).Additionally, 2017;Božić 2005; Peternel (Zlodi atia's society and of polarization view ethnic the of Cro - process of consolidating ranks their in communitiesethnic went through the 1990s. Following end the of conflict, violence duringethnicity-based the competition inYugoslavia, and later, with statehood aspirations, interethnic to national the se majority's experiences –atdesigned –as arespon least inpart - minorities'. The national statehood was membersthe of autochthonous national of Croatian the people and state the of Croatia is established as nation the state Constitution states that Republic 'the of group. The Preamble the Croatianof is anation-state of its dominant ethnic alongside other post-Yugoslav all states, cs mightbecause justified Croatia, be majority. the endowed rights with political equal to ons of states, these but as lesscitizens so historically resident minority populati- participationpolitical as autochthonous, Turks have of focus the research been in and Macedonia's post-Ohrid Roma and andsnia Herzegovina's Roma and Jews, Gorani, Turks,Bosniaks, Roma- and Bo As inpost-conflict Croatia, Kosovo's nant groups inpost-conflict Yugoslavia. scant attention granted to non-domi- settlement. conflictin the Croatian statehood, but were neglected national politics at various stages of participating inmunicipal, and local, communities these All have long been arecades, rarely granted any attention. dominantboth and Croats Serbs for de- central Croatia and have co-resided with Croatia, livingtral in as well as Bosniaks have present been - and inEastern Cen munities of Ruthenians and Slovaks that The on focus national-levelpoliti - This omission the in also is reflected non-Croat citizens (HRW 1999). onal state with but token concessions to minorities turally or religiously defined traditional members cul of ethnically, linguistically, citizens themselvesall identify who as individual andspecial group rights to law-making flurry. It explicitlygrants centrepiece of EU-accession-related the of National Minorities (2002) was the formal process. political non-dominant groups' interests in the complex guaranteed representation of negotiations. Today, Croatia the boasts to ensure of start the EUaccession the put into of place aset minority policies Democratic Union (SDP) took power the from Croatian the Democratic Party of Social new Croatia groups When other than Serbs. the the attentionnal to rights the of minority NATO and EUsparked the internatio- Croatia's prospective accession to both It was not until early the 2000sthat Representation Minority and Rules Electoral 3 per; it is adifferentper; in story practice. In rities. Minority great looks policy on- pa ber, there is to no need work with mino- as Croatia EUmem- has become afull under EUpressure.loped the But now, accession, minority were policies deve- long as Croatia was process inthe of EU of case the other accession countries, 'as declarational of identity. ethnic As was stitutions solely on based individu the - municipal, regional and state-level in- exclusive their elect representatives to minorityall citizens can now directly atties levels of all institutions: political representationcal minori of ethnic - all cursor to exclusive rights for politi the - terms.ethnic right This a been haspre - have individual the

The ConstitutionalThe Law theRights on manjina, Art. 5. Art. manjina, nacionalnih opravima zakon Ustavni . 3 Hence, Croatian all citizens (HDZ) in 2000, they (HDZ) in2000,they right to in identify - but there is no budget for anything.' principle, (minorities) have everything, 4 negotiate inclusion the of candida their - legislative at levels, as bodies all well as regular proportional elections for the owntheir candidate 'ethnic' lists inthe guaranteed seats, minorities set can also structure the Beyond of bodies. sory arewhich minorities' dedicated advi - elections for national minority councils, by casting an vote ethnic special inthe members can express preference their rity candidate. Furthermore, minority for ballot their aregular and/or amino- double the use suffrageright andcast to executive minority bodies, voters can onal and municipal level, for elections designated electoral list. ethnic At regi- right representatives to elect from the units,'ethnic' i.e. using exclusive their units,vic' i.e. regular electoral lists, or ought voting between to choose for 'ci- registeredthose as minority members minorities by minorities. At state level, suring exclusive the representation of mobilisation ethno-political ses by en- 2009: 3;Thomassen 2014). verse segments of electorate the (Herron extending (some) representation to di- as avenues should seen they time be to on past performance, at while same the based ofelecting to those elected the sms for establishing accountability the therefore rules Electoral are mechani- no)political agendas (Birch 2003:17). strategise inaccomplishing- (eth their candidates and nominating groups to opportunities and challenges for voters, on of state-building the nation, offering in place as an effect political of aspirati - regard, we electoral should the rules see mobilisationcal of issues. ethnic In this are points focal for assessing politi the -

Croatia's electoral system incentivi- This suggeststhat politics electoral June 2018. June 27 Zagreb, Parliament, Croatian in Deputy Minority the to Advisor an with Interview 4 and advisory bodies at institutional bodies both and advisory representatives into executive, legislative citizens ethnic' can'their directly elect ight overall in the population, minority onDepending demographic their we- representationty are more fine-grained. self-government, provisions for minori- organized regionally. proportional is which electoral district, unit, vote or will ifthey regular inthe exclusive state-level minority electoral withincast ethnically the ballot their rities have will right the to ifthey decide themselves as members of mino- these vel legislature. citizens All declare who for representative their state-le inthe - tother cast a'civic' or an vote 'ethnic' eligible minority voter has ei- to choose post-Yugoslav minorities. autochthonoussmaller and 'new' the an additional two seats are for reserved seat with atiny Slovak community, and relatively numerous Czechs share one Hungarian minorities have one each, seats, largethree reserved Italian and ight: largest the community has of Serbs generally reflects its demographic we- forats reserved asingle community Parliament (Sabor proportionally-elected otherwise in the oftal eight (out seats of 140)reserved national minorities are ato allocated - support during electoral the cycle. tes on lists civic inexchange parties' for 5

At level the of regional and municipal At level the of state the legislature, 2018/11/01). sabor.hr/Default.aspx?art=16930 Accessed 16; http://www. Art Parliament, Croatian the to of Representatives (Act on Election representative one joint elect equally ties) minori national Slovenian and donian Mace Montenegrin, Bosniak, (Albanian, 'new minorities' of the members and ment, Parlia to one representative elect together Jewish) and Vallachian Ukrainian, Turkish, Russian,Roma, Ruthenian, Romanian, Polish, German, Bulgarian, (Austrian, minorities old so-called of the Members ). The number se- of 5 Hence, each - - -

53 T. Agarin, P. Čermák, Descriptive Representation and Political Participation, Anali 16 (1) 49-70 (2019) 54 Anali Hrvatskog politološkog društva 2019. 7 6 candidates). hanism (i.e. vote for a 'non-ethnic' list of means of aproportional electoral- mec according to demographic their share by norities are represented proportionally threshold locally, or 5%regionally, mi- on demographics inthe reaches 15% the of minority voters; once proporti their - seats in municipal legislatures with 5% rities are additionally granted reserved residents. Moreover, since 2013,mino- cipalities with 15%or more minority municipalin the executives of muni- minority residents, and deputy mayor cutives of counties with 5%or more deputycted prefect regional inthe exe- Minorities are granted directly-ele their - asfect well as for minority their deputy. can vote for both regular the mayor/pre- voters registered as minority members ly minority ethnic run-off elections:All 'double suffrage'so-called inexclusive- statethe level, minorities are granted the cipal executive members, incontrast to levels. In elections of regional and muni- presence, we conduct our analysis at the character of localized the minorities' gional and national elections. participationpolitical inmunicipal, re- on non-dominant minorities' ethnic voice, 'ethnic' their use cally we focus

To voters whether ascertain strategi- (Jakešević, Tatalović, and Lacović 2015) Lacović and Tatalović, (Jakešević, vima nacionalnih manjina opra zakon Ustavni parties, successful the from candidate minority highest-ranking the co-opt to extended then is councillors of number the reached: not is tionality the propor or filled not is seat granted the when for cases legislatures municipal and regional in heard voices minorities' make to guarantee additional an is There were less affected by the previous conflict. the previous by affected less were that of Croatia parts other in also numbers larger in settle who Roma and Bosniaks for important is distinction this henians), Rut Slovaks, Czechs, (Hungarians, zones conflict former the within mainly trated concen are research by the covered rities mino non-dominant of the some While 6 , Art. 20, see also also see 20, , Art. 7 Due to Due - - - - - Kneževi Vinogradi).Kneževi chs inKončanica and Hungarians the in position of municipal majority Cze- (the two communities are themselves inthe positionthe of municipal majority, and dominantthe minority is in Serbs) (the Croats), three are inareas settled where gether with dominant the majority (the (23) live as a municipal minority to- of Daruvar. While most communities much as 2,485Czechs urban inthe town municipality rural the Tompojevci to as tion from goes just 141Hungarians in Končanica and absolute their popula- rians inErdut up to 47%of Czechs in populations ranges from 5%of Hunga- ve share groups of these all inmunicipal a few isolated municipalities. The relati- other groups ethnic are present inonly sting adjacent of several municipalities, populateBosniaks larger areas consi - Whilevaks). Hungarians, Czechs and Hungarians, Ruthenians, Roma, Slo- nant groups compete Czechs, (Bosniaks, Croatia where sixdifferent non-domi- grounds post-conflict inthe areas of nicipalities as relevant electoral battle­ lusive rights. political hic criteriagranted to be exc- ethnically communitiesthe demograp that fulfil - only included municipal those minority cipal population census data. We have groupsethnic on 2011muni the based - identifiedthe relevant non-dominant post-conflict municipalities, we have form aplurality electorate. inthe In all ble share of total populations, but often communities account for anon-negligi- minant groups non-dominant because choices political the made by non-do- level is appropriate for analysis the of electoral basic the units. The municipal vernment administrations, as well as municipal and self-go- socio-political strative units, and are they main the also admini- as primary the cipalities serve level of municipalities. Croatia's muni- Altogether, we have identified 27 mu- Source: census Official (2011) data Table 1. Non-dominant minorities in post-conflict areas of Croatia coveredthis in study hnic community for electoral purposes zen can self-declare as member of an et- As outlined above, Croatian citi every - in Elections Participation Groups' Non-Dominant Slovaks Ruthenians Roma Hungarians Czechs Bosniaks Minority Punitovci Ilok Našice Tompojevci Bogdanovci Jagodnjak Darda Tompojevci Vladislavci Petlovac Erdut Tordinci Ernestinovo Darda Draž ManastirBeli Bilje VinogradiKneževi Hercegovac Sirač Dežanovac Polje Grubišno Končanica Daruvar Cetingrad Vojnić Drenovci Gunja Municipality 'only' as aCroat citizen.perceptions The a 'member of an community', ethnic or choice identity of primary their as either citizen thus can cast following aballot a identity. ethnic self-selected this Each rights political attachedwith further to 1.078 1.671 1.784 1.109 1.110 2.485 1.108 Pop 666 935 272 444 154 650 141 172 330 370 371 422 482 680 801 196 251 627 314 318 352 Pop % Pop 37% 14% 17% 23% 14% 18% 19% 25% 30% 39% 11% 23% 17% 47% 21% 15% 30% 7% 8% 9% 9% 9% 5% 7% 8% 8% 7% 7%

55 T. Agarin, P. Čermák, Descriptive Representation and Political Participation, Anali 16 (1) 49-70 (2019) 56 Anali Hrvatskog politološkog društva 2019. Source: Authors' calculationsbasedontheofficial censusandelectoraldata share on population: = share of votes cast Index of mobilisation ethno-political share on population: = share of voters registered identificationIndex of ethno-political across types election Table of 2.Levels identification ethno-political and mobilisation forgroups single mobilisation of that group at ballot the determine levels the of ethno-political for would thustifying purposes political about utility the - ofself-iden ethnically Minority Local Parliament Parliament Local Minority Election type Election Election type Election in minority electoral units (on total votes casted) divided bv minority 2015 2011 2007 2016 2015 2011 2007 2003 2017 2013 2003 year 2003 2007 2011 2015 2016 2013 2017 2003 2007 2011 2015 year 0 0 0 0 0 0 asminority (on total voters registered) divided by minority 101% 115% 104% 77% 85% 96% 80% 67% 88% 81% 73% 65% 98% 69% HU 102% 100% 103% 100% 80% 95% 79% 73% 76% 83% 90% 91% 91% 98% HU 18% 73% 45% 20% 16% 17% 17% 75% 35% 37% 51% 46% 57% 72% CZ 56% 87% 84% 63% 50% 54% 55% 59% 86% 89% 93% 79% 76% 86% CZ office. presentatives government elected inthe visibility of minority ethnic re political - box. This, in turn, would enhancethe 34% 57% 33% 29% 26% 32% 50% 45% 28% 35% 49% 16% 34% 68% SK 51% 82% 81% 51% 38% 56% 56% 56% 82% 83% 80% 79% 80% 85% SK 42% 94% 39% 38% 34% 40% 54% 90% 18% 25% 36% 51% 67% 99% RU 75% 94% 94% 88% 77% 69% 70% 73% 94% 94% 97% 94% 91% 95% RU 121% 111% 62% 61% 57% 60% 84% 54% 35% 21% RO 9% 69% 60% 36% 48% 64% 98% 96% 33% 52% 62% 95%

RO 63% 34% 47% 64% 13% 53% 66% 50% 50% 56% 42% 36% 61% BO 8% 43% 55% 50% 29% 36% 42% 51% 57% 47% 64% 84% 42% 63% BO 9% 78% 44% 52% 61% 35% 58% 75% 37% 44% 55% 55% 44% 47% 81% 58% 54% 60% 69% 72% 82% 86% 69% 80% 74% 87% 62% 84% 77% 0 0 such correlation higher the the between vote 'ethnic' to their use all them and as ticipate inelections, we donot expect non-dominant groups registered par re electorate. inthe As members of the lines, thustheir reflecting overall sha- placetakes exclusively along ethnic the mobilisation of non-dominant groups allows us to political assess the whether its identity ethnic through voting. This choice,tical actively does which express identities- no-social with ethno-poli the of minority groups- eth their align who mobilisationlitical indicates share the red The as index 'ethnic'. - of ethno-po than share the of voters merely registe- share of votes ethnic actual cast rather is constructed analogously, but with the any givensecond The electoral district. pulation share of minority the group in registeredall electors by divided - po the of voters as identify aminority who on first the cted index the taking shareby in non-dominant groups. We constru- levelthe of mobilisation ethno-political vels of identification ethno-political created two indexes to estimate le- the have who those effectively voted) and headcounts in electoral registers and available demographic data (minority non-dominant groups, the we collected mobilisation and representation in representation? stitutional incentives for ethno-political fferparticipationtheir in in light of in- non-dominant communities ethnic di- different types of elections? Finally, do vable difference inethnic voting across ons overall? Second, is there an obser preference for voting 'ethnic' - in electi nic representatives translate into higher First, opportunity the does - eth to elect minant groups societies. individed hno-political representation of non-do- impact the sess of incentive-driven et- interrelated issues that help will us as- To assess relationship the between We are primarily interested inthree and and - -

8 tion of participation. political indexes would indicate- ethnicisa higher ballots castballots for 'majority' the candidates. compounded by even lower numbers of ters within minority the electoral unit is numbersmall of registered minority vo- of community': defined an ethnically the as a 'voter',fy rather than as a 'member segments of minorities primarily identi- ctions. This difference shows that large ficantly dropsthe in national level ele- identification forpolitical ends- signi that instrumental the of use serve ethnic of vote,use 'ethnic' their yet as we ob- minority population generally makes absent from elections. the preferthey casting 'civic' their vote, or withdo identify an electorate, ethnic yet re are large of minorities parts all who tion and mobilisation indicates that- the levels ofdiscrepancy between identifica- elections (75% compared to 58%). The level of mobilisation of across types all is generally significantlythan the higher lared identificationwith group an ethnic Vuković 2015).Unsurprisingly,- dec the protection mechanisms (Glaurdić and entrenchment of nation-wide minority growingthesince reflects 2007,which identification haverising been steadily ver, here levels the of ethno-political is62%, which relatively modest. Howe- a'civic' andbetween an vote 'ethnic' is at ons where minorities have to choose mobilisation- inparliamentary electi In contrast, levels of ethno-political where voters dual can their vote. use elections (average 77%across groups) cipal elections (84%)and for minority 2017 are significantly higher for muni- of set the 2003and elections between identificationethno-political across

As Table 2shows, alarge of part the dataOur suggests that levels the of dless of differences in population. in of differences dless regar values, municipal of single average simple the as calculated are values palities, munici several in settled For minorities 8 - -

57 T. Agarin, P. Čermák, Descriptive Representation and Political Participation, Anali 16 (1) 49-70 (2019) 58 Anali Hrvatskog politološkog društva 2019. tion make mobilisation ethno-political centives for representa ethnicity-based - As we have above, seen institutional in- in conflict-affected regions of Croatia. for non-dominant all period the groups mobilisationcal of identity ethnic over showwhich uneven paths politi inthe - councilty elections dating back to 2002 have data on parliamentary and minori- across different types of elections. We differencean observable inethnic voting criptive data table inthe above, there is Petričušić 2002). and 2004; Baketa KovačićOmejec 2010; across minority groups (Tatalović 2007; non-dominantall groups and is shared tes for for ballots the seat the reserved XIIthathic electoral District cumula- created, specially in the non-geograp- tatives of non-dominant all groups run stipulatingelectoral rules that represen- national elections. uld likelyuld result in the candidate from one's own group wo- votingethnic has: casting for a ballot a tion findings as acounterfactual confirma of minority veto clauses, we these take representatives as well as absence the number seats for of reserved minority tuency. of population ethnic the consti inthe - votes in comparison to overall the share vote, pushing down ratio the of ethnic hold would more be likely to cast a'civic' numericallytoo to thres the meet small - therefore suggest groups that those all at polling station. the The results could special ballot' red as minority, to need ask for they the rity candidates –despite registe being - stered minority voters) to vote for mino- Arguably 'it is uncomfortable for (regi- 9

However, as we noted from des- the Additionally, and given negligible the 2018. 27 June Zagreb, Presidency, SDAH Party Bosniak of the Member with Interview ofthat effects the institutionalised 9 , adding to peer-pressure This resultsfrom the loss of the vote in - didate to state-level the institutions, for voting for one's own can 'ethnic' - This shows a relatively high propensity elections (62%and 52%,respectively). levels of mobilisation inparliamentary low level identification the high reflects ons (77%and 44%,respectively) and level mobilisation inminority- electi vels of identificationthere is only low minant group. 'waste' of vote their to an other non-do- 'civic' vote over and ballot 'ethnic' their a would merely result choice intheir of a empowerment of community. their This from perception their of political the nant groups' representative, is divorced presentation with a'generic' non-domi- elections,nal wherecompete they for re- inan voteir ballots ethnic at natio the - choicethe of minority voters to cast- the 2015. nority seat national in the parliament in of whom were for running same the mi- Jankovicsbert and Sandor Juhas, both two competingbetween candidates,- Ro intensifiedthe intra-ethnic competition ctorate aresult is to widely be believed of upward trend within Hungarian the ele- to national elections. For example, an community once we switch focus the upward mobilisation Hungarian inthe council elections, but only asustainable over of inminority time said the period Hungarians, groups Roma and Bosniak of mobilisation ethno-political of the gs note remarkable particularly the rise turnoutal (Petričušić findin- 2012).Our own groups and regardless of actu their - number seats within their of reserved choicetheir of representatives for afixed rity communities are already limited in councilty elections, members of mino- importantis also to note that in minori- at of expense 'civic' the their vote. Yet, it to avail themselves of vote 'ethnic' their sufficiently attractive thefor electorate Indeed, despite relatively the le- high Consequently, we should assume that 2. LevelsFigure ofethno-political mobilisation across minorities in time Authors'Source: calculations based onofficial census and election data 19 nority members are 'wasting' ci- their that fact the by voting ethnically, mi- statein the level elections considering of mobilisation are relatively still high civic and vote. ethnic However, levels choicefactor of necessary between the despite potentially the discouraging Source: Authors' on calculations official based census and election data Figure of 1.Levels identification ethno-political across minoritiestime in Average IDE Average IDE Slovaks Ruthenians IDE IDE Roma Hungarians IDE E ID chs Cze IDE Bosniaks 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,2 1,4 0 1 2003m 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,2 1,4 0 1 03 07 01 05 2016p 2015p 2011p 2007p 2003p PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS 2007m MINORITY ELECTIONS MINORITY ve of just that. non-dominant Hungarians is suggesti- hno-political mobilisation among the presentatives: upward the trend inet- of minorities state-level in their re- (or at least some) degree of confidence vote.vic This indicates a relatively high 2011m 2015m Slovaks IDE Slovaks Hungarians IDE Hungarians Bosniaks IDE Bosniaks Czechs IDE Czechs Ruthenians IDE Ruthenians Average IDE Average Roma IDE Roma Roma IDE Roma Ruthenians IDE Ruthenians Hungarians IDE Hungarians Slovaks IDE Slovaks Average IDE Average Bosniaks IDE Bosniaks IDE Czechs

59 T. Agarin, P. Čermák, Descriptive Representation and Political Participation, Anali 16 (1) 49-70 (2019) 60 Anali Hrvatskog politološkog društva 2019. Table Table 1. Non-dominantminorities in post-conflict areas Croatia of covered in this study Authors'Source: calculations based onofficial census and election data 20 Source: Authors' on calculations official based census and election data pal elections (78%), indicatingpal that most mobilisation is highest for munici the - degreethe of identification,the level of for 'non-ethnic' candidates. Similar to res where can concurrently they vote in elections tosed municipal- structu Figure of 2.Levels mobilisation ethno-political across minorities intime Minorities are mobili particularly - Average MOB Average MOB Slovaks MOB nians Ruthe MOB Roma MOB Hungarians Czechs MOB MOB Bosniaks 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,2 1,4 0 1 2003m 0,2 0,4 0,6 0,8 1,2 1,4 0 1 03 07 01 05 2016p 2015p 2011p 2007p 2003p PARLIAMENTARY ELECTIONS 2007m MINORITY ELECTIONS MINORITY time, levels of mobilisa ethno-political - content, are likely to know candidate's the policy nic community inelections where they representative the to elect of- eth their exclusive their douse also vote 'ethnic' of voters the as identify minority who 2011m and their identity. their At same the 2015m Czechs MOB Czechs MOB Average MOB Bosniaks MOB Roma Ruthenians MOB Ruthenians Slovaks MOB Slovaks MOB Hungarians

Slovaks MOB Slovaks Roma MOB Roma Czechs MOB Czechs Bosniaks MOB MOB Average Ruthenians MOB Ruthenians Hungarians MOB Hungarians

legislature and executive institutions. cantly lower than for representation in with participation- signifi criteria set designated demographic thresholds, minorityspecial elections inareas with areelections: these separately elected in minant groups' mobilisation inminority significant differences among non-do- for minorities the all above, there are in parliamentary and minority elections decline of mobilisation ethno-political While we gradual have the observed mobilise primarily along lines. ethnic municipal level elections, where they non-dominant minority groups fair in lisation and would like to explore how no-political identification and mobi- minority institutions. institutions, and least the for own their ce, significantly less forthe state level atlised municipal the level of governan- that minority voters are most the mobi - 11 10 life.'cal centrethe of cultural [their] and politi- has become a"grounding" structure; it is For 'The Islamic Bosniaks, community on for casting an vote 'ethnic' instead. tangible pay-offs for identificati ethnic - in minority elections, there are arguably content,cal as inmunicipal elections or identitiespoliticised rather than politi- competitionlitical where voters assess sentative organs. In context the of- po as repre political ness of bodies these - interest and effective in the - trust weak monstrates that citizens have only scant minorityto local institutions, de- which tion are clearly lowest elections in the

We have looked at levels the of- eth (Petričušić 2011).(Petričušić of 10 members 25 to consisting council minority special their elect then can level) regional atthe (500 people 1.5% or 200 for than more accounting communities Those directly. representative ethnic' 'their elect can people 100 atleast counting ties communi or regional municipal Even tiny sentative, Cetingrad, 10 2015. June Cetingrad, sentative, Repre Religious aBosniak with Interview 10 Overall, the findings the indicate Overall, 11 - ­

bly (IDS),aregional party.' foralso Istrian the Democratic Assem- with astrong regional identity), perhaps of centre" [SDP], and inIstria (an area unitty mainly vote for option the "left not castwithin minori the ballot their - do who claims,interviewees 'Bosniaks operation across Croatia: as one of our groups' these reflected in is also co- participation. ethno-political their This Roma show stable and fast growth of corded rapid both ups and downs, the minority re Bosniak the - while greatly: on minorities in 'new' have fluctuated levelsthe of mobilisati ethno-political - minority elections. For most the part, bilisation over for time municipal and identification, yet show fluctuating mo- stable and levels high of ethno-political The 'old'sniaks). minorities experience nians) and minorities 'new' - (Roma, Bo (Czechs, Slovaks, Hungarians, Ruthe- with significant differences between 'old' mobilisationtical at level this of politics muchthe less stable levels of- ethno-poli electoral units, vividly which illustrates mobilisation. and level the of ethno-political their te population of minority communities relative the between no link or absolu- longitudinal data that there is generally portantly, we can clearly from see the of mobilisation political over time. Im- stable,groups' reflecting ethnic pattern of mobilisation ethno-political remains community. This regardless of population the share of the nicipal communities is relatively similar level ofded mobilisation of single mu- minorities. For most groups, recor the mobilisation across non-dominant all patternsup-based of ethno-political Across board, the we findgro similar - 12 time, 'Local Bosniaks inTopusko Bosniaks time, 'Local to used

Different minorities separatereside in Cetingrad, 10 2015. June Cetingrad, Community, Bosniak of the Representative Municipal Elected an with Interview suggests 12 that level the At same the -

61 T. Agarin, P. Čermák, Descriptive Representation and Political Participation, Anali 16 (1) 49-70 (2019) 62 Anali Hrvatskog politološkog društva 2019.

Table 3. Demographic and electoral profile of minorities of Croatia

POPULATION VOTERS REGISTERED MINORITY VOTES FOR PARLIAMENT Ethnic categories 1991 % 2001 % 2011 % 2003 2007 2011 2015 2016 2003 2007 2011 2015 2016 Croats 3.736.356 78,1% 3.977.171 89,6% 3.874.321 90,4% Serbs 581.663 12,2% 201.631 4,5% 186.633 4,4% 222.769 190.510 183.992 195.628 193.624 47.610 25.741 22.933 18.976 19.534 Total 175.117 3,7% 149.158 3,4% 149.663 3,5% 61.110 58.389 66.138 103.898 104.439 20.271 19.142 22.183 18.507 18.368 Italians 21.303 0,4% 19.363 0,4% 17.807 0,4% 12.520 11.230 10.005 18.018 17.985 6.051 4.803 3.157 2.447 2.338 Hungarians 22.355 0,5% 16.595 0,4% 14.048 0,3% 10.366 9.619 9.731 12.218 12.328 4.204 4.327 4.798 4.475 5.212 Czechs 13.086 0,3% 10.510 0,2% 9.641 0,2% 7.386 6.266 6.927 10.865 10.827 3.357 2.663 3.360 2.127 1.590 Slovaks 5.606 0,1% 4.712 0,1% 4.753 0,1% Bosniaks 43.469 0,9% 20.755 0,5% 31.479 0,7% 21.930 21.380 26.312 44.242 44.550 4.726 4.524 6.233 4.764 5.396 Muslims 19.677 0,4% 7.558 0,2% Albanians 12.032 0,3% 15.082 0,3% 17.513 0,4% Slovenes 22.376 0,5% 13.173 0,3% 10.517 0,2% Montene- 9.724 0,2% 4.926 0,1% 4.517 0,1% grins Other ethnic Macedo- minorities 6.280 0,1% 4.270 0,1% 4.138 0,1% nians (clustered according Roma 6.695 0,1% 9.465 0,2% 16.975 0,4% to electoral units) Germans 2.635 0,1% 2.902 0,1% 2.965 0,1% Ruthenians 3.253 0,1% 2.337 0,1% 1.936 0,0% Ukrainians 2.494 0,1% 1.977 0,0% 1.878 0,0% Russians 706 0,0% 906 0,0% 1.279 0,0% Poles 679 0,0% 567 0,0% 672 0,0% 8.908 9.894 13.163 18.555 18.749 1.933 2.825 4.635 4.694 3.832 Jews 600 0,0% 576 0,0% 509 0,0% Romanians 810 0,0% 475 0,0% 435 0,0% Bulgarians 458 0,0% 331 0,0% 350 0,0% Turks 320 0,0% 300 0,0% 367 0,0% Austrians 214 0,0% 247 0,0% 297 0,0% Vlahs 22 0,0% 12 0,0% 29 0,0% Total 291.129 6,1% 109.500 2,5% 74.208 1,7% Non-ethnic Yugoslavs 106.041 2,2% 176 0,0% 331 0,0% identities Reg. ident. 45.493 1,0% 9.302 0,2% 27.225 0,6% Others 139.595 2,9% 100.022 2,3% 46.652 1,1%

Source: Official census data and election data provided by the Central Election Commission basis alone.' […] to mobilise on politically an ethnic environment, political the 'it is difficult across Croatia and well integrated into group the Bosniaks, mostthe dispersed more candidates, 'ethnic' with whilst Romathe living inclusters tend to field tegies at group the level. For example, differentthe politicalparticipation - stra participation patterns help us identify however, group-specificsettlement and competition at national level. Overall, to a normalisationgradual of political vels. If anything, dynamics these point fluctuationstheir in mobilisation le- due to significantand the Bosniaks the most rapid mobilisation; ethno-political mobilisation; Roma the of because their level of full ethno-political a virtually Hungariansthe exhibited they because ups should noted be separately here: tion inmunicipal elections. Threegro - levelsin the of single groups' mobilisa- We have noted significant differences Participation Political in Differences Intergroup with.' align will Bosniaks the who HDZ,itof remains local the seen to be during war. the Afterthe recent breakup Croatian inthe army served also them HDZ,and tosome close local the ofbe 14 13 view: representative political their inan inter integrated', 'too be as demonstrated by for example,Bosniaks, are perceived to municipal dynamics. political Croatia's ceived sufficient to be enough to impact Croatia, but numbers their are not per are present in urban settings throughout

June 2018. June 27 Zagreb, Parliament, Croatian in Deputy Minority the to Advisor with Interview Re Bosniak Elected aLocal with Interview serious threat for Croatian Bosniaks. gration and assimilation, is which a ­pre 'Therebetween intethin line is a - sentative, Topusko, 2015. 9June ­sentative, 14 Bosniaks and Albanians Bosniaks 13 - - 15 mobilisation and difference the between ctions as anticipated. to vote-in inmunicipal aco-ethnic ele- vel mobilisation but by opportunity the notdetermined by overall the group-le- level of mobilisation ethno-political is clearlyctoral districts suggests that the groups fieldingthe majoritytheir in ele- electionstwo (39%).Thecases these of in minority (42%)and parliamentary yet only limited interest voting inethnic tatives to municipal the administration voting(94%) when for represen their - mobilisation ethnic show full virtually trend was recorded for Ruthenians, who minority (17%) elections. Asimilar municipal (73%),state-level (45%)and levelthe of mobilisation of Czechs for significantwe see discrepanciesbetween of elections. types contrary, Onthe all of single municipal communities across for Hungarian the minority at level the no-political mobilisation are confirmed norities. in electoral units that include mi- 'new' nant minorities, yet much more rapidly showing for aclear rise non-domi all - for parliamentary elections since 2003, rity voters registering on rolls ethnic are reflected in also numbers of mino- rities (Table census 3).These figures is aclear upward trend mino in'new' - demographicexperience decline, there of 'old' minoritiesod 2001-2011:while from demographic the data for- peri the consolidationtical clearly is also visible

Generally, level the of ethno-political The significantlylevels higher eth- of This on-going process - of ethno-poli 2018. 27 June Zagreb, Presidency, SDAH Party Bosniak of the Member with Interview will become ethnic Croats.' become ethnic will church instead of amosque and they to start attend will too. Bosniaks a onal identity, andthe finally religion First, language the is lost, nati then - 15

63 T. Agarin, P. Čermák, Descriptive Representation and Political Participation, Anali 16 (1) 49-70 (2019) 64 Anali Hrvatskog politološkog društva 2019. living [or] dispersed inZagreb.' enough,se yet it is different Bosniaks for "other"their homeland: is clo- …Bosnia as living to close border the Bosnia see meland' is proximity: inclose 'Bosniaks complicated putative ifthe ho - 'ethnic considerations and is this additionally rences are 'crowded being out' by civic of representation, political diffe ethnic - foreground identity ethnic for purposes dominantthe Croats. consolidationethno-political alongside ordistricts an on-going process of their fferent minorities in municipal electoral gests potential competition di- between mobilisation,ethno-political sugwhich - showties fluctuating risingyet levels of vonia). contrary, Onthe minori 'new' - and inEastern Western(especially Sla - andtition Croats the Serbs the between context of prevalent intergroup compe- solidated identity ethno-political inthe mobilisation, indicates which con their - show more stable and levels higher of nistrations. 'Old' minorities generally norities at level the of municipal admi- representationpolitical of mi- ethnic lisation, but by potential the impact of bydetermined group the level mobi- 'old' and minorities 'new' is not much so 16 teed political representation. political teed Whilst, her as recognized minority, nor guaran- no-)religious category 'Muslim' is neit- is represented,Bosniaks - (eth the while only '(ethno-)national the minority' of competitionpolitical within group: the lack of intra-ethnic cohesion rather than communityon of Bosniak the is due to a

We that despite observe incentives to It is that widely believed representati- sentative, Cetingrad, 10 2015. June Cetingrad, sentative, Repre Religious a Bosniak with Interview gnized as minority,gnized Muslims while that) are only reco legally - Bosniaks difference inidentity … (implying and Muslims is not on any based real 'the division between Bosniaks division'the Bosniaks between 16 - 19 18 17 norities, level elections.pal Alongside other mi- bettercan communicated be inmunici - and economicwith social issues, which voters express concern primary their at salience loses municipal the ties level, and cultural status of communi ethnic -

Additionally, as religious, the political Cetingrad, 10 2015. June Cetingrad, Community, Bosniak of the Representative Municipal Elected an with Interview 10 2015. June Cetingrad, sentative, Repre Religious aBosniak with Interview cipal Representative, Darda, 24 April 2017. April 24 Darda, Representative, cipal Muni Minority Elected an with Interview sniaks.' army- Bosnian ted the as identify Bo Muslims, suppor who those while conflict),the tendself-declare to as (i.e. neutral and later pro-Serb during were who those onwar: Abdić's side This distinction emerged theduring are subsumed of apart to "others". be war).' area (devastated and depopulated by reshape make-up (ethnic the of the) coming to area the and would they pport, there would more be Bosniaks If were they to receive (financial) su- at discriminates times, against them. notte does offerthem support and, ving Kordun inthe region,- sta the so rest of state the to have li- Bosniaks Itmic perspective. is not inte inthe - for a lower wage'. Hungarian or aRoma accepts it even a Croat ajoboffer, rejects Serb, a a nomic position of minorities. While area eventually improved- eco the region. depopulation General of the are gone, that it devastated whole the They only today,realized all when re-integration (of Slavonia). Eastern and Roma the were fleeing after the Hungarians the Serbs, the when ties and interest eveninthe of some par 'Bosniaks are missing'Bosniaks any econo- 'It right for was all (Croat) the state 18 17 19 - - - - Romani community fielded morecan - in2007.In elected be later elections, the sufficient the for Romani candidate to dispersion of votes, only 351votes were teworthy that as aresult of such awide te landed who third inthe place. It is no- 100 votes more than candida aGerman - secondthe Roma candidate, and about majority of 37votes of ahead Nada Bajić, te, Nazif Memedi, only secured a slight ofrise participation types. election inall community with most the pronounced identificationlitical fortheRoma, a group-specific phenomena- in ethno-po 21 20 rities,' majoritythe granted rights the to mino- another community… Here, in Croatia, minority.the No group arisk to poses it is clear majority the who is, and who lations inCroatia have resolved, been as rightsal to minorities: 'Inter-ethnic re- applaud majority the for extending equ- tion. Although Romani representatives challenge to representa political their - non-dominant communities a poses

In winning 2007, the Roma candida- The diversity of interests of Croatia's 2018. 27 June Zagreb, Presidency, SDAH Party Bosniak of the aMember with Interview June 2018. June 27 Zagreb, Parliament, Croatian in Deputy Minority the to Advisor an with Interview electing their candidate.' their electing of electorate, the have in succeeded deputy Albanians, the while with half donoton have where Bosniaks the a BDS party. This resulted inasituati- ssor, Nedžad Hodžić, from rival the It was withsimilar then his succe - and problems. his everyday Bosniak tes: he didnot care about average the community during his two manda- fice 2003-2011)did nothing forthe Tanković, standing for SDAH, inof- former parliamentary deputy (Šemso representatives political ty is that the 'The problem minori Bosniak - for 21 there persist some noteworthy 20 viewees comments,viewees Romani politics'. becoming 'adominant figurethe in elections,tedly the win over years the community, Kajtazi was able to- repea broadthis appeal to entire the Romani senting of all Croatia's regions. Ensuring nizations of (sub-)groups all and repre- public by reaching out to Romani orga- status representation and racialised in issuesthe of socio-economic weak their for heterogeneous this group around has developed aclear profile political community. German the Veljko Kajtazi of second-running candidate the from again in2016by 53%compared to 30% second-running Romani candidate, and winning 41%of vote the over 17%of the lidated 2015elections inthe his by lead albeit with only 24votes. Kajtazi conso- ofahead second the Romani candidate, electoralthe racein2011 and came first didates, yet Veljko Kajtazi dominated 23 22 it has a reserved single seatit of has its areserved own. values inparliamentary elections, where and over time, with significantly higher identificationboth across electionsall shows highest the level of ethno-political with Hungarian the sed minority, which

A similar spill-over waswitnes effect - June 2018.June 27 Zagreb, Parliament, Croatian in Deputy Minority the to Advisor an with Interview June 2018. June 27 Zagreb, Parliament, Croatian in Deputy Minority the to Advisor an with Interview their political behaviour. political their cio-economic situation determines have preferences, political - so their [And, as Roma the] generally do not compactly, are they mobilised. easily vote will everyone for it. As live they sive, ifone votes for asingle party, communities are internally cohe- votethey homogenously. Their local Roma communities sincepolitically (Today), it isto easy exploit the 22 As one of our inter 23 -

65 T. Agarin, P. Čermák, Descriptive Representation and Political Participation, Anali 16 (1) 49-70 (2019) 66 Anali Hrvatskog politološkog društva 2019. guaranteed seats to share reserved with nic electoral coalitions groups between oretically, would this result in cross-eth- seat. The- cess to reserved asingle ethnic intra-ethnic listssed for groups with ac- should encourage formation the of clo- presentatives of non-dominant groups' foremost, seats for reserved re political - investigation tested to be here. First and that there avenues are further several for of non-dominant groups, we believe representationcal on mobilisation the incentivesnal for politi- ethnicised the exploration of impact the of institutio- pluralities electoral intheir districts. non-dominant minorities are defacto only inmunicipal elections, i.e. where through viewed is an best prism ethnic ofelection minority councils, politicking national elections as well as during the identity seats inthe to access reserved tional incentives to foreground ethnic can thus establish that, despite institu- of representation. type ethnic in this We rather low, indicating only interest weak ctions, values for minority elections are and relatively for high state-level ele- arly highest the inmunicipal elections While levels the of mobilisation are cle- structures inmunicipal level elections. avail themselves of opportunity political from opportunity their to access and groups' levels of mobilisation that result various the ce between non-dominant we were able to establish differen the - ding of to and type election; the finally, mobilisationethno-political accor vary second, how we discussed levels of their mobilisation electoral inthe process; on levels their of identification versus regionsct of Croatia. First, we focused dominantthe groups post-confli inthe - effects mobilisationof ethno-political by communitiesethnic the to ascertain in electoral behaviour of non-dominant We have explored dynamics varying the Discussion While paper the offers earlyan stage - being frombeing outside one's own group is not group's the being representative, or candidate standing in for group the but than ones. 'ethnic' for Casting aballot a systematically cast 'civic'rather ballots voting. ethnic constituentslised These counterfactual effects of institutiona- another 10minorities) corroborates the Ruthenian candidates (together with joint the ses, of running Ukrainian and and absence the of minority veto clau- ved seats for minority representatives showcases point. this ble representation of Czechs and Slovaks tion constituency. inthe Thelack visiof - to overall the share of popula - ethnic the ratiothe of votes ethnic incomparison kely to cast a'civic' vote, pushing down to small cut threshold the rically are li- groupsthat those all that are nume too - Roma. other Onthe side, we have seen ons, as we of clearly case inthe the see elections as compared to Sabor in different electoral dynamicsthese in decision-making political ushersscale nicipal elections. Participation insmall to'closer home', i.e. inregional or mu- communities encourage voting ethnic tation from numerically the negligible and value of practical represen political - in Croatia: levels high of the symbolic lism among non-dominant the groups cond-hand of evidence cliente political - group. the within basis ample spacefor politicking on issue the complete, there is as with Bosniaks, the consolidationethnic of group the is in- with guaranteed seats. However, where community ethnic a distinct, recognised groups that can present a clear front as in Croatia inrelation to non-dominant there is some that evidence happens this latter inthe discussed of part paper, the threshold.ss necessary the As we have ment, as well can who cro as with those - other minorities national inthe parlia - Given negligible the number of reser At same the time, we have found- se electi - - the dominantthe groups innational, mu- impact of competition ethnic between researchfurther to assess is needed the of representation. political poses Thus, centives for identify to ethnically pur happensthis inspite of institutional in- tion of competition. political Critically, pointsthem to normalisa gradual the - to that of majority the of electing those declared not ethnicity does correspond returningdistricts candidates whose to participation political inelectoral identities.politicised Greater attention ters assess content political rather than to competition political akin where vo- - building agenda. tiating Croat the majority's nation-state apparenttheir competitors ethnic nego- by dominant the groups, as well as by ethnicisationflict political of processes to delicatetically situations of con post - non-dominant minorities respond- poli groundwork for understanding how than over issues. policy are inplace to vote over identity rather 'civic' vote institutional when incentives preference over 'ethnic' to their use their ctions on non-dominant communities' nicipal as well as minority council ele- Overall, however,Overall, we have laid the

67 T. Agarin, P. Čermák, Descriptive Representation and Political Participation, Anali 16 (1) 49-70 (2019) 68 Anali Hrvatskog politološkog društva 2019. Glaurdić, Josip, Vuković, Vuk. 2015. Fearon, James D., Laitin, David D. 2003. Fred.Cocozzelli, Minorities 2008.Small Petr.Čermák, 2017.Reintegration of Nina.Caspersen, 2008. Intragroup Di- Gordana.Božić, 2010.The Divi- Ethnic Birch, Sarah. 2003.Electoral Systems and Nikica.Barić, 2011.Srpskaoblast Istoč- Nikola,Baketa, Kovačić, Marko. 2010. References org/10.1177/1465116515580179. Politics Referendum Vote. Union European rests and War inCroatia's EU Legacy Prosperity and Peace: Economic Inte - (97) 1:75–90. American Political. Science Review Ethnicity, Insurgency, and War.Civil doi.org/10.1080/17449050802307528. hnopolitics Egyptians in Post-Conflict Kosovo. Muslim Slavs and Roms, Ashkalis and Polity:in aDivided Turks, Bosniaks, 4: 191–229. Croatian Political Review Science nicipalities Western inthe Balkans. nic Conflict: Mixed Ethnically Mu- Communities by Divided Local Eth- 2: 239–265. Nationalism and Ethnic Politics. (14) pular Grievances to Power Struggles. visions inEthnic Conflicts: From Po- /00085006.2010.11092650. 3–4: 273–298. https://doi.org/10.1080 sovo. Among Non-Serb Minorities in Ko- sion of Education and Relations the Macmillan. Europe munist Political Transformation Post-Com in 393–454. Slavonica dio).Scrinia (Prvi reintegracije Hrvatskog podunavlja. "Oluje" –od jem dodovršetka mirne na Slavonija, Baranja Sri- iZapadni njine. analize Političke Tko ikako predstavlja nacionalne ma- Canadian Slavonic Papers . (16)4:577–600. https://doi. . (7) 2–3: 287–306. https:// . Basingstoke: Palgrave . (1)3:11–14. . (11)1: . (52) . (53) Et - - Juon, Andreas. 2020. Minorities Over Kocsis, Károly, Kocsis-Hodosi, Eszter. Klemenčič, Matjaž, Zupančič, Jernej. Kalyvas, Stathis N.2008.Ethnic- Defecti Gurr, Ted 1994. Peoples Robert. Against Gregurović, Margareta. 2014.Sociološki Jelić, Margareta, Biruški, Čorkalo Din- Jakešević, Ružica, Tatalović,- Siniša, La HRW. 1999.Croatia. Class Ci- Second Herron, 2009.Elections Erik. and Demo - (37) 1:1–10. 1998. g/10.1080/0090599042000296186. Papers. Post-Yugoslavthe States. Nationalities Hungarian and Italian Minorities in Yugoslavia on Minority the Rights of 2004. The Effects the of Dissolution of org/10.1177/0010414008317949. Studies. on War. inCivil Comparative Political Review. lemma. and Exclusion-amid-Inclusion the Di- looked: Group-Based Power-Sharing nal Studies Quarterly Changing World System. Internatio States: Ethnopolitical the andConflict manities Sciences. and Social University of Zagreb, Faculty of Hu- mjeru Hrvatske. PhD thesis). Zagreb: aspekti predrasuda etničkih na pri - Conflict. Conflict. Guiltof Collective afterthe Violent ka, Ajduković, Dejan.2013. Predictors perspektiveke i predstavnika.nalnosti vijeća njina uHrvatskoj –problemi- funkcio kog predstavništva nacionalnih ma- cović, Tomislav. 2015.Oblici politič- 1999/croatia/. https://www.hrw.org/legacy/reports/ Serbs tizens: Theof Croatia. 11/3. Palgrave Macmillan. cracy afterCommunism? Basingstoke: Ethnic Geography of the Hunga - (32) 4: 853–896. https://doi.or (41)1. (41)8:1043–1068.https://doi. International Political Science Collegium Antropologicum . (5)3:9–36. . (38)347–377. Politič - - - . Petričušić, Antonija. 2012.Vijeća naci- Petričušić, Antonija. 2002. Constituti- Peternel, Škiljan, Lana, Filip. 2017. Et- Perić Kaselj, Marina, Škiljan, Filip, Vu- Pap, Nikola. 2015.Stradanje Rusina u Jasna.Omejec, 2004.Političko pred- McLaughlin, the S. 2007. Beyond Eric Kut, Şule. 2000.Turks of Kosovo: What Krasniqi, Citizens, 2015. Equal Gëzim. legitimiteta iuglavnom neostvarene onalnih manjina. Institucija upitnog (2) 1:607-629. European Yearbook of Minority Issues. Minorities Republic inthe of Croatia. onal Law on Rights the of National 1: 213-232. ne. Primjer bošnjačke nacionalne manji- niciteti, nacije igranice na Kordunu: doi.org/10.17234/SEC.27.1. Croaticagica Republici Hrvatskoj. Studia Ethnolo nacionalnih manjinskih zajednica u nička situacija: promjene identiteta Aleksandar.kić, 2015.Događaj iet- movinskom_ratu_1991-92.pdf. doc/Knjige/Stradanje_Rusina_u_do- http://www.savezrusina.hr/fileadmin/ Savezvar: Rusina Republike Hrvatske. Domovinskom Vuko ratu 1991./92. sustavima. studije Međunarodne slovenskim irumunjskim izbornim parlamentu: Usporedba hrvatskog sa stavljanje nacionalnih manjina u (40) 4:435–456. Africa. of Ethnolinguistic Cleavages inSouth Census: The Racial Political Salience Affairs ternational Perceptions:to Expect. Journal of In- Ethnopolitics. vo. and Hierarchical Citizenship inKoso - Uneven Communities: Differentiated Institute. sin rian Minorities in the Carpathian- Ba . Budapest: Geographical Research Studia Ethnologica Croatica Comparative Political Studies . (27) 1: 37–36. https:// (14)2:197–217. . (5)3:49-60. . 3-4. . (28) - - . Wood, Mo Jean. Elisabeth - 2015.Social Wimmer, Andreas. 1997.Who Owns Wilhelmsen, Julie. aRock 2005.Between Trifunovska, Snezana. 1998.Minority Thomassen, Jacques.Represen 2014. - Tatalović, Siniša. 2007.National Minori- Škiljan, Filip. 2013.Kako su nacionalne Szabolcs, Lászsló. 2012.From Zitzer the Rygolová, Jugo Kristýna. 2016.Raspad - The Oxford Handbook Socialof Mo- Porta, Donatella, Diani, Mario (eds.). Legacies. Della In: andSocial Their bilization and Violence War inCivil 5078.1997.00631.x. 666. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1354- NationalismNations and in Conflict Societies. Post-Colonial State?the Understanding Ethnic Europe-Asia Studies Chechenthe Separatist Movement. and aHard Place: The Islamisation of 4: 463-482. nal on Minority and Group Rights. (6) Rights inCroatia. International Jour Press, pp 1–19. untability. Oxford: Oxford University Democracy: Representation and Acco- massen, Jacques (Ed.). Elections and tation and Accountability. In: Tho- misao andties Croatian Demoracy. 7-36. istoriju, demokratiju ipomirenje, pp. Discrimination tions: Minority Rights – Fight against Jugoslavije? In: Croatian-Serbian Rela manjine uHrvatskoj raspad dočekale tics Romanian Journal of Society and Poli- 1991-1995Yugoslav inthe ties Wars. volvement of Hungarian the Minori- Club to Battle the of Laslovo. The In- Iadertina Slavica ugodinamata 1991.–1992.Croatica et slavije na stranicama Jedno tjednika. - in filozofijo prava. (2012)17:91–104. nadležnosti. . (7)2:7–24. . (43)5:45–59. Revija za ustavno za Revija teorijo . Novi Sad:Centar za . (11)1:211–228. . (57)1:35–59. . (3)4:631– Politička Politička - -

69 T. Agarin, P. Čermák, Descriptive Representation and Political Participation, Anali 16 (1) 49-70 (2019) 70 Anali Hrvatskog politološkog društva 2019. Živić, Dražen, Pokos,Živić, Nenad.- 2004. De skog rata depopulacije kaoodrednica mografski gubitci tijekom Domovin- Press., pp. 452-466. vements. Oxford: Oxford University konfliktno društvo,Hrvatska post izbori, nedominantne manjine, lokalni participacija, Ključne riječi politička institucijakojejamče političkopredstavljanje razini. tičkih nanacionalnojilokalnoj zacija odražava trajnu važnost politikeidentiteta ukontekstu etniciziranih vrlo poli- mobili- danjihovaprethodno etničko-politička bilepogođenesukobompokazuje Analiza političkemobilizacijenedominantnih uregijama skupina Hrvatskoj. kojesu bile pogođeneetnopolitičkomdinamikomdominantnih upostkonfliktnoj skupina nedominantnih kojesu skupina nost etničkogidentiteta participaciju zapolitičku bileutemeljitelji istražuje kojesudefacto važ skupina država.- Rad nantnih etničkih nazemljopisnimmale skupine područjimakojasubilapogođenasukobom domi- te,Bošnjake Albance kasnije, iM konstitutivnenarode federativneje uključivao jugoslavenske države: Srbe, Hrvate, N Sažetak sudjelovanje manjina uHrvatskoj nedominantnih uizborima Deskriptivno predstavništvo i politička participacija: participacija: ipolitička predstavništvo Deskriptivno iz etničkih sukoba na Zapadnom Balkanu devedesetih godinaprimarno sukobanaZapadnomBalkanu iz etničkih akedonce. E Zlodi, Zdravka. 2005.Rusini/Ukrajin Zdravka. Zlodi, - 1: 408–431. problem Slavonica imena. Scrinia ci uHrvatskoj –etape doseljavanja i istraživanja. (13)4-5:727–750. Hrvatske (1991.–2001.).Društvena tničko nasiljezahvatilo jeibrojčano . (5) -