STATE BUILDING in DEEPLY DIVIDED SOCIETIES BEYOND DAYTON in BOSNIA Sofia Sebastian Aparicio

STATE BUILDING IN DEEPLY DIVIDED SOCIETIES BEYOND DAYTON IN BOSNIA Sofia Sebastian Aparicio A Dissertation Submitted to the Department of Government of the London School of Economics in Fulfillment of the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy Department of Government London School of Economics October 2009 UMI Number: U615B05 All rights reserved INFORMATION TO ALL USERS The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted. In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed, a note will indicate the deletion. Dissertation Publishing UMI U615B05 Published by ProQuest LLC 2014. Copyright in the Dissertation held by the Author. Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC. All rights reserved. This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code. ProQuest LLC 789 East Eisenhower Parkway P.O. Box 1346 Ann Arbor, Ml 48106-1346 T tte B S q (9 0 ot Porttce1 Declaration I certify that the thesis I have presented for examination for the MPhil/PhD degree of the London School of Economics and Political Science is solely my own work other than where I have clearly indicated that it is the work of others (in which case the extent of any work carried out jointly by me and any other person is clearly identified in it). The copyright of this thesis rests with the author. Quotation from it is permitted, provided that full acknowledgement is made. This thesis may not be reproduced without the prior written consent of the author. I warrant that this authorization does not, to the best of my belief, infringe the rights of any third party. Sofia Sebastian Aparicio Sofia Sebastian Aparicio Page 2 10/30/09 ABSTRACT This dissertation focuses on post-conflict Bosnia, one of Europe’s most divided post conflict societies, and where the external leadership of the state building process has been pronounced. The specific goal is to delineate a framework of analysis that accounts for the elite dynamics involved in the state building process in Bosnia in the context of the EU accession process. The main research question is: how and under what circumstances can external actors shape domestic change in deeply divided societies? How may external actors affect the interests, goals, and strategies of domestic actors in post-conflict, divided societies? Can local actors resist external pressure? In order to explore these issues empirically, this dissertation examines the process of constitutional reform in Bosnia in 2005-2006, and draws from 80 personal interviews with the key players and other actors involved. The thesis brings a large body of evidence into a process that was, heretofore, largely unknown and shrouded in secrecy. The dissertation is framed within the paradigms of state building and international conditionality; which I argue do not adequately capture the nuances and complexities of post-conflict Bosnia. Drawing from the literature on conflict regulation and other plural society theories, I propose a unique three-tiered framework, and argue that this approach represents a more comprehensive construct for analyzing post-conflict Bosnia. More specifically, this approach dissects the process of constitutional reform from an inter-ethnic, intra-ethnic, and what I term ‘supra-national’ level (the latter referring to the interactions between domestic and external actors). The study of these interactions is likely to help us define better policies in post-conflict state building processes. I conclude that the international push in Bosnia, and the transformative power of the EU were blunted by an ethnic power game. While external actors did play a substantive role, the neglect of intra-ethnic dynamics rendered external actors’ efforts at shaping the process of constitutional reform in Bosnia ineffective. Sofia Sebastian Aparicio Page 3 10/30/09 ACKNOWLEDMENTS I would like to express my most sincere gratitude to Piet Gauchat, my husband, for having made this long, extrenous journey bearable. You have been the greatest support any PhD student could ever ask for. Thanks for your patience, your support, your encouragement, and your wise words about shortening my sentences. It has been a long journey, and I am most indebted to your positive spirit and energy. I do not have enough words to express my gratitude. I would also like to thank my parents, Antonia and Felix, and my sisters, Begona and Yolanda, for their patience and support from afar. I am sorry this process took away so much valuable family time. Ariane, Nick, Anne, Urs and Juliet have been a great support as well. They are the best in-laws I could have ever dreamed of. My friends in Madrid, London, New York, Sarajevo and Washington also deserve recognition, especially Sara and Irene, for being there when I needed them. A special thanks to Katherine Shamraj for reading the whole dissertation (and for her valuable editorial comments), and to my girlfriends in Madrid for forcing me to put down my dissertation a week before my wedding. Beyond personal support, I would like to thank Prof. James Hughes, for his timely feedback when I needed it, and numerous others who have helped me along the way. In particular, I would like to thank all of my interviewees for taking the time to meet with me. A special thanks to Denis Hazovic of the Center of Security Studies in Sarajevo, and Haris Mesinovic, whose help during my fieldwork in Sarajevo was greatly appreciated. I would also like to thank Velma for offering me a place to stay and the Spanish EUPM officer who so kindly helped me find a place to stay the day I arrived in Sarajevo without a lodging plan. Finally, I need to thank UACES (the University Association for Contemporary Studies) for the financial support provided for my stay in Sarajevo in 2007; the Harriman Institute at Columbia University, where I was a Visiting Scholar for most of the writing period; and the Madrid-based think tank FRIDE for providing me a venue to write and discuss developments in the Western Balkans. Thanks to all for the support. Sofia Sebastian Aparicio Page 4 10/30/09 TABLE OF CONTENTS List of tables and figures 8 Abbreviations 9 Chapter 1: Introduction ________________________________________________ 11 1.1. Introduction 11 1.2. Beyond Dayton? 14 1.3. The Context: State Building and European Integration 20 1.4. Research Questions 27 1.5. Theoretical Framework 28 1.6. Hypothesis 31 1.7. Why Bosnia? Why Constitutional Reform? 32 1.8. Methodology 38 1.9. Organization of the Dissertation 51 Part I. Conceptual Framework 54 Chapter 2: Literature Review and TheoreticalFramework _____________________ 55 2.1. Forms of External Influence 55 2.2. Literature Review: State Building and Conditionality 61 2.2.1. Post-conflict State Building 63 2.2.2. Conditionality Studies 67 2.2.3. A Critical Review: International Push in Post-conflict, Divided Societies 73 2.3. From the Two-Level to the Three-Level Framework: Conflict Regulation in Post-Conflict, Divided Societies 77 3.3.1. The First-Level: Inter-Ethnic Relations in Post-Conflict, Divided Settings 79 3.3.2. The Second-Level: Intra-Ethnic Dynamics and the Politics of Outbidding 82 3.3.3. The Supra-National Level: Interactions between External and Domestic Actors 85 2.4. Conclusions 89 Part n . Dayton 92 Chapter 3: The Dayton Framework ______________________________________ 93 3.1. Dayton and the Constitutional Debate in Bosnia 93 3.1.1. The Constitutional Debate Before the War 93 3.1.2. The Constitutional Debate During The War 102 3.1.3. Dayton’s Annex Four: Key Provisions in The Bosnian Constitution 110 3.2. The Implementation of Dayton: Patterns of External Intervention 116 3.2.1. External Intervention and the ‘War by other means’ (1996-1997) 118 3.2.2. Civilian Implementation and the Bonn Powers (1998-2000) 123 3.2.3. External Intervention after the 2000 Peace Implementation Council (2000-2005) 128 3.3. Conclusions 139 Sofia Sebastian Aparicio Page 5 10/30/09 Part III. Beyond Dayton 140 Chapter 4: The Rationale and Origins of Constitutional Reform _______________ 141 4.1. The Origins of Constitutional Reform 141 4.1.1. The Constituent People’s Case 141 4.1.2. Constitutional Debates in 2000-2004 146 4.1.2. Initial Steps (2004-2005) 149 4.2. The Rationale for Constitutional Reform 153 4.3. The Rules and Format of Constitutional Negotiations 165 Chapter 5: Constitutional Reform I: Inter-Ethnic Divisions Come to the Fore 173 5.1. Phase I: The Involvement of Party leaders 173 5.1.1. Preliminary Talks: Proceedings of the Working Group 172 5.1.2. Involvement of Party leaders 180 5.2. Analysis of Phase I 187 5.2.1. Inter-ethnic Anxieties: The Limiting Parameters of the Political Debate in Bosnia 188 5.2.2. Intra-ethnic Level: Intra-Party Power Struggles 200 5.3.3. Supra-national Dynamics: Limited External Intervention 207 5.3. Conclusions 211 Chapter 6: Constitutional Reform II: Intensified External Support _____________ 214 6.1. Phase II: The US Takes Over 214 6.1.1. The US Takes Over Formally 214 6.1.2. The Collapse of Multilateral Negotiations 219 6.1.3. Amendments to the Bosnian Constitution 225 6.2. Analysis of Phase II 235 6.2.1. The Impact of the US 235 6.2.2. The Role of the EU and its Member States as Minor Players 239 6.3. Conclusions 244 Chapter 7: Constitutional Reform III: Intra-Ethnic Divisions and the Failure of the Constitutional Agreement _________________________________ 246 7.1. Phase III: Public Discussions in Parliament 246 7.2. Analysis of Phase III 251 7.2.1.

Load more