CEU eTD Collection In partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts T HE I THE COMPELLING DIFFERENCES DENTITY OF NATIONALISM STUDIESPROGRAM CENTRAL EUROPEANUNIVERSITY Supervisor: Professor András Kovács H A Thesis Submitted to A Thesis Submitted ERZEGOVINA Budapest, Hungary Ivan Mati Ivan C 2010 ROATS IN By ü : B OSNIA AND CEU eTD Collection all the wonderful colleagues with whom with of myI sharednine moths whom all life. exiting themost wonderful colleagues the extendgratitudemy Finally, tothe CEUNationalism deepest wish to Program Studies I and me and keeping my life exciting. and my loveliest Monique. Also, many thanks to my Russian anti-capitalistfor being there for Danny, Georgi,Asja, Jovana memories: Anja, Brigitta, experiencefull warm of unforgettable I am thosewhoextremely muchgrateful to became more friends than and madeBudapest answered all my of questions. patiently who interviewees the of all to and ; in haven a me offered generously who Senad to needed; whenever my disposal at being for Picula Tonino to way; one than more in A books. special goesto thanks my family in the lovely city Dubrovnikof whosustained me several by richer is library personal my whom to thanks and possible been have not would “Bosna Srebrena”, especially father Mato Topi Mato father especially “Bosna Srebrena”, is hospitablemembers Franciscan province the the of dueto gratitude Deepest assistance. invaluableKovácssupervisor, helpful Prof.András whowasabundantly and offered This thesis havewould not beenpossible without supportandguidancethe ofmy patient Acknowledgments i ü without whose kind assistance my my research assistance whose kind without CEU eTD Collection ii the crazy third cousins third the crazy For TheFamily and CEU eTD Collection Appendix 5...... 79 Appendix 4...... 78 Appendix 3...... 77 Appendix 2...... 76 Appendix 1...... 75 BIBLIOGRAPY...... 70 CONCLUSION...... 63 CHAPTER IV- Explaining the Differences...... 49 CHAPTER III- The Interviews and The ...... 37 Research Results CHAPTER II – The Faces of Croatian ...... 22 Nationalism CHAPTER I – The ...... 5 Historical Background INTRODUCTION...... 1 iii TABLE OF CONTENTS...... i Acknowledgments ...... TABLEOF CONTENTS 4.4. The unstable society...... 60 4.3. Population Structure and the “experience of the other”...... 57 4.2. The Remainings of the Failed Politics...... 53 4.1. The Historical Experiences and Regional Identities...... 50 3.3. Results of the research – similarities and differences...... 44 3.2. The Interview types...... 40 3.1. Time, Place and Subjects ...... 37 of the Interviews 2.3. Croatian experience in and ...... 31 2.2. Particularities of the 20 2.1. The19 1.4. The break ...... 17 up of 1.3. The experience of the 20th century...... 13 1.2. The Croatian National Revival...... 11 1.1. The Franciscans of “Silver Bosnia”...... 6 th century Croatian National ...... 23 Movement th Croatian ...... 25 National Movement iii CEU eTD Collection 127 [ 5 pp 129 – 149 [ of of Herzegovinians “Bosnia”when only is used. part the and on offence the state the full name of usageof the the he justifies goes on, factors, between two parts of the state. The different historical experiences and the whole set of differences serious are there other that and Herzegovina and as Bosnia same the isnot Bosnia . Bosnia and supremacy of larger entities in states with two elements in itsname, with special emphases on Croatian Columnistfrom problemHerzegovina, dedicatedone ofhisarticles tothe of leaving out Herzegovina will not go un-noticed by Herzegovinians. When I answered to vice I answeredto goun-noticed When Herzegovina by Herzegovinians. not leaving outwill 4 Herzegovinians?)” and The Future 3-4 (6), pp. 37 – 86 [ 3 Sarajevo Sarajevo, „Magistrat“ “ only but embassy the of address the in state the of name Presidency state here.will be that more presented research detailed for incentive the provided originally they and numerous are Examples Herzegovina. from expectreactions is can used,one “Bosnia” nameonly Herzegovina and Bosnia full state the in itself, the ongoing debate on the usage of the state abbreviations does.Whenever instead of dualismnecessary any oneitthe acceptAlthough contains nameitself the other proof doesn’t Imamovi members: one from eachthree of with the threePresidency The is dominantlevel state of the ethnic institutions ofthe groups.One level. For local the moreand onlevel entity structurethe level, of B&H’s government see 2 1 INTRODUCTION An Dodig, Radoslav (2005) “Hercegovina ili esej o Lu According to the Dayton Peace Treaty Bosnia and Herzegovina has three levels of the government: the state the government: of the levels three has Herzegovina and Bosnia Treaty Peace Dayton the to According Further on the abbreviation B&H will usually be used instead of the long full name of the country. þLü þLü eng. “What is Bosnia without Herzegovina?” , Ivo, (2005) “Ima liHercegovine? (Tko i zašto negira Hercegovinu Hercegovce?)”i National in Security , Mladen (2005) “Što je Bosna bez Hercegovine?” in National Security and The Future 3-4 (6), pp. 87 – Professor Lu Bosnia and Herzegovina ü , Mustafa (2006) Bosnia and Herzegovina: Evolutionof Its Political and Legal Institutions, eng. “Herzegovina or essay on“land on the edge” ] 2 protested against the state’s Ambassador to NATO who didn’t used the fullNATO the whodidn’t used to Ambassador against state’s the protested þLü mentions a public debate in B&H after the Croatian member of in mentions the memberof Croatian a public B&H after the debate 4 Professor An eng. “Is there Herzegovina?( Who and why denies Herzegovina and 1 : already the name of the state indicates certain dualism. indicates certain name the state : already of the þLü zemlji na zemlji ] is more concrete in his article explaining that just 1 ü 5 enaru Even my own experience confirmed that confirmed experience my own Even ] “ in National Security The and Future 3-4 (6), Ambasade deBosnie” Ambasade . 3 Dodig, a CEU eTD Collection land they identify further Precisely such indicationswith. research. encouraged exercised,in this case, through a demand touse a full state name that contains the name of the corrected mecorrected by I am saying that toBosniagoing andHerzegovina. http://napredak.com.ba see information more For work. creative cultural new and general in heritage cultural Croatian promoting 6 it before “[r]omanization well Herzegovina sense (…)”andentered thatcultural-historical in influence Mediterranean of boundaries stronger mark the same time atthe and region “[m]ountain chainMakljan – Ivan – definition Herzegovina thatwillof be throughout this used thesis. Byacknowledgingthat until today. since by they this doing actually affirm differences didexist that andhave obviously survived from in 19th losses the haven’tcentury. recovered still because the they Bosnianthat deny Franciscans veryexistencethe of a distinctive Orderin Herzegovina distinctive shows identity on, developed. have could that Herzegovinian Franciscans andits population hadeducation different from background Bosnian ones and so Herzegovina that part, Herzegovinian and Bosnian on was divided Franciscan Province that aga Rizvanbegovi president of “Napredak” branch of 9 8 conducted an interview Aprilon 18, 2010 Dubrovnik,in . 7 “Napredak” is Croatian cultural society with a task of encouraging education of Croatian people, and Ibid. pp. 53 - 54 Malcolm, Noel (2002) “Bosnia: A short history“, Pan Macmillan, London: p. 121 Vice-president of Dubrovnik branch of “Napredak” is Marinko Mari All of this indicated existence of a strong regional identity identity existence regional All of of indicated population of Herzegovina a strong this Radoslav Dodig confirms these differences and as differences Radoslav confirmsa geographical Dodig provides also with these Ivo Lu Knowingin that 1832 Herzegovina from become separated Bosnia underelayet Ali- þLü provides an example of how this division is exercised today. He explains ü (website available in English) 8 , that Herzegovina vicariate was separated from in 1847after, vicariate wasseparated Bosnian , thatHerzegovina ý emerno, sharply divides Bosnia from emerno, sharply Bosniadivides Herzegovina from 2 6 that I am going to Bosnia, he immediately he Bosnia, to am going I that ü , born in Herzegovina, with whom I 7 9 Itcontains a paradox CEU eTD Collection to Herzegovinato much earlier than in inner Bosnia. territory, marks also the border of Mediterranean influence in a cultural – historical sense. Romanization came Bosne.“ kulturno-historijskom smislu bosansko od hercegova 2005, pp 129 – 149 (pp. 131); “ 10 answers. offering will aim at thesis this questions some of the agree? Theseare it reform?to finddifficult Whydothey state the in in towards Why identities attitudes have are? and Herzegovina Bosnia different do did How being into in inidentity these firstplace? these the come Howstrong differences a problem? without “Bosnian”) home more (and feeling astheir perceive Bosnia while others Bosnian. the and Herzegovinian the realities: of issues (like the inpopulation B&His tohow with divided they identify they respect how and series approach state reform) and explanationthat for why they thismanifest the way they do.division Therefore, it will be argued that apossible offer Croatian and differences these of sources explore the to however, is, idea The main follows the border inCroats Bosnia living andHerzegovina:in those living andinHerzegovina those Bosnia. between the two construction. in their selective always are that politics identity itin hardly Herzegovina, seem,was would a same future formedfor abasis This thing. Franciscans and populations in regions. these in two Being aCroat Bosnia andbeing a Croat plausible argue to differentthat cultural influences conditioned differentdevelopments ofboth development. cultural primarily inner (…)” entered Bosnia Dodig, Radoslav (2005) Hercegovina ili esej o „zemlji na na esej o„zemlji ili Hercegovina (2005) Radoslav Dodig, [ Why are some Croats in B&H so attached to Republic of Croatia (and feeling Croat) feeling (and Croatia Republic of to attached in so B&H Croats some Why are The task of this thesis is to present first the differences among the two groupsitis with between Together differences and Bosnia, Herzegovina geographical of eng. The mountain chains Makljen-Ivan- þ kog podru “; (134) “ Planinski vijenci napotezu Makljen – Ivan – 10 þ heimplies Herzegovinathat andBosniahaddifferentpaths of ja, obilježavaju ujedno granicu ja Romanizacija je uHercegovinu prodrla znatno prije nego uunutrašnjost ý ] emerno sharply divide Bosnian from Herzegovinian 3 ü enaru“ in National Security and The Future 3-4 (6) 3-4 Future The and Security National in enaru“ þ ih prodora mediteranskih utjecaja u ý emerno, koji oštro razdvajaju CEU eTD Collection 13 12 11 of B&H structure administrative of the reform “homeland issue” to arerelated for this research interest were of specific that Attitudes livingin B&H. of Croats attitudes quantitative)differingon data (not collect qualitative to was The aimof research the its results. with together chapter third in the bewill described that in field research a tested experience“Croatian” inBosnia and Herzegovina. in crucial 19 differences among Catholic developed identity Croatian how understanding population for necessary is which ingeneral identity in B&H. Two main topics will be covered byregions. this chapter:different intwo Croats among experienced the they were how and B&H in centuries two last events importantpresent isin some ofthemost inthe aimof to chapter thiscountry. this The Herzegovina by providing ahistorical framework within identity Croatian shapewhich took reasons behind division. the the understand help together that factors four offer will chapter this oversimplification, experienceidentities) thatnourisheddifferent anda falling thus into trap of inamong Croats andHerzegovinaBosnia usingonlyone dimension differing(the historical inexplain attempts Contrary tothose division to previous the chapters. presented differences Is the reform needed? If yes on what basis should it beimplemented? it should basis what yes on If needed? reform the Is yes? if how and B&H? Why in endangered Croats Are Herzegovina? and Bosnia in living of Croats homeland the is What This ongoing on differences debate in among Croats Bosnia and Herzegovina was will national few factson The Croatian by emphasizing second chapter continue and inBosnia Croats among in attitudes differences explain will chapter first The The forth and the last chapter, will finally offer the possible explanation for the for explanation possible the offer finally will chapter, last the and forth The 11 , the status of Croat entity entity andinof Bosnia Herzegovina Croat , the status th and present day Croatian national identity and the particularity of particularity the and identity national Croatian day present and 13 4 and the future of B&H. 12 , the need for the for need , the CEU eTD Collection Dayton BosniaDayton and Herzegovina. Second World YugoslaviaCommunistfinally War, (Tito) break and up of the Yugoslavia and considered to be the beginning of this process. of this beginning bethe to considered century century – HungarianAustroOttoman rule, first (Kingrule, Kara identity began develop in to firstthe halfof 19 the national Croatian fact that from comes the for this main reason previous The periods. refer to and its future. some of reasons the behind amongattitudes differenttowards Bosnia Croats andHerzegovina having inmind later they will on be usedtosupport mainthe hypothesis and helpexplain greater Thesignificance events iseven these of themselves asCroats. predominantly to refer who today ofit), parts just (sometimes its population Catholic on effect particular had some events centurieslast inin two the B&H. oftheseinfluencedits Some all inhabitants of and 15 14 more in detail followingthe chapters. in be will debated however, This, ona issues. range of Croats of attitudes Herzegovina the mentality identity its regional cultivated inseparate haveinfluenced and might Herzegovina, differently in by Croats inBosnia and Herzegovina.Croats Theseevents strengthened will be that arguments for presentedinformation relevant offer rarely they be, might times earlier as interesting here. Special emphases will be on those events that were experienced in country. this isprovide inevitable to ahistorical first framework within shape which identity Croatian took CHAPTER I– The Historical Background The “Illirian movement“ [hrv. movement“ “Illirian The For amapof Bosnia Herzegovinaand see Appendix 1 The chapter will focus mainly on events in the 19 in the events on mainly focus will chapter The The main topics of The main will following of topics chapter this cover the B&Hhistory: periods of 19 in amongIn order toexplainCroats inattitudes andHerzegovinait Bosnia differences 14 It is the intention of this chapter to present some of the most important most the of some present to chapter this of intention is the It Ilirski pokre Ilirski t] also known as “National Revival “ [hrv. “ Revival “National as known also t] 5 th century and not before th and 20 ÿ or th century and will rarely ÿ evi Nacionalni preporod ü ) Yugoslavia, The 15 . Therefore, as . Therefore, ] is th CEU eTD Collection rije settlement close to the silver mines, it was named after it and so was the province of the Franciscan Order. Franciscan 19 ofthe province the sowas it and after named was it mines, silver the to close settlement first Franciscan monasteries was built serving as a first seat of the province. Since the city was built as a mining 18 Catholicism in Bosniaand Herzegovina contribution to the development of literature is well documented and recognized. In order to In order and recognized. is well documented literature of development the to contribution Herzegovina. modern of time onthe territory and Bosnia functioning remainedclergy only the pastoral time inBosnia Herzegovina and the 1878Austrian(after invasion), Franciscans practically 1340. in vicariate (Franciscan) Bosnian foundation beof with the crowned to wassoon This process members of the Dominican Order (the first order to settle Bosnian territory) out of Bosnia. protection and support of local nobility (mostnotably Kotromani strong and deeprelationship with localthe population. their as well as is undisputable, B&H today’s of territory the on Catholicism of preservation Bosnian Franciscan Order and its missionaries. The importance of their presence and work for Bosnia and Herzegovina issuesand of identity theirwithout takingintoconsideration the Bosnia” of“Silver The Franciscans 1.1. 17 B&H. 16 development(s): first The Franciscan Order and second “National Revival” movement its and identity(s) Croatian their country, in this Catholics for relevant as focus Karamati “Bosna Srebrena“ [ Džaja, M., Sre Although this movement started in Croatia it exercised significant influence on the Catholic population of þ i, Sarajevo:i, p43 [eng. 17 This will later be widely known as the Franciscan Province “Bosna Srebrena” Since then Sincefor 1881,when churchhierarchy till thefirstthen official the was established The first Franciscans arrived in Bosnia already in the mid 13 mid in the already in Bosnia arrived Franciscans first The It isimpossiblemake to conclusions anyrelevant about Catholic the population of There are at least two features of features19 of two least at There are ü , Marko (1992.) “Franjevci BosneSrebrene uvrijeme austrougarska uprave 1878 – 1914”, Svijetlo 19 ü ko (1997) “Katoli Their importance for the preservation of Catholic population well as as Catholic population of for thepreservation importance Their lat. Bosnia Argentina Franciscans of Silver Bosnia under Austro-Hungarian administration 1878 – 1914 þ anstvo u Bosni i Hercegovini“, HKD Napredak, Sarajevo: pp. 50 – 51[ ] ] was named after the Bosnian city of Srebrenica, where one ofthe one where Srebrenica, city of Bosnian the after named ] was th century Bosnia into and century come that Herzegovina 6 ü dynasty) they pushed th century with the 18 16 . . eng. ] CEU eTD Collection functioning as some kind of community elite they, expect respect, enjoyed no privileges communitythat usually leadersgo but with only as it.also not people as community with interacted members Franciscans who that all us shows he shared thepractices everyday same and choirs burdens their of life.describing Although insight into difficult circumstances of upbringing of young members of The Order or the so called “ called so the or Order of The members young of of upbringing circumstances difficult into insight Hercegovini na prijelazu iz 18. u 19. stolje franjevcu vidio svoga i zemaljskog i nebeskog zaštitnika. 22 the rule of his own thathe saw in aFranciscan the earthly and heavenlyprotector.” 2005, pp 129 – 149 (pp. 139); “ 21 20 among its population in the 19 inone. all difficulties, life’s sharing neighbours fellow and educators a unique constitute priests, leaders, Herzegovina. examplebybeingcommunity Franciscans strong and unusual between relationship Franciscans and Catholics in Bosnia and people. common of from those differ did not that Order members Franciscan the of of practices everyday difficult the describes difficult life of Ottomaneducated Franciscansup andsawto community them leaders. as rule togetherno surprise that ordinary Catholic peasant with little or (more often) no education at all looked with is therefore It population. their influence over exercise strong to authority necessary them the their Catholic Word”, being Catholics“Good educatedpeople(andthus gave also theonly teachers) among flock. protectors". andcelestial “terrestrial people’s Historian hostileSre atmospheremystical andincomprehensible” link andoffers apossible explanation claiming in that a (like that of the Ottomanday. present tothe existed andCatholic arepreserved population Empire) today. a practice even Franciscans remains which (uncle) “Ujak” as friars their to referred population Catholic the them, protect were seen and felt as For more see chapter on “Odgoj i život klera” in Džaja, M Sre Dodig, Radoslav (2005) “Hercegovina ili esej o Malcolm, Noel (2002)“Bosnia: A short history“,Macmillan, Pan London: pp. 53, 98 - 100 With nationalist ideas from Croatia and making their way into Bosnia and Bosnia into way their making Serbia and Croatia from ideas nationalist With more sharing for Franciscansmust beenmuch Furthermore, have respected the ProminentCroatian Columnist and Radoslav Dodigresearcher describes “almost this 20 Everything indicates that close ties between Franciscans and the and Franciscans between ties close that indicates Everything Možda je razlogom to što je hercegova th century, religions became century,religions nationalized as well. Linking ü e, Krš 22 It is here that we should seek for the sources of the ü zemlji na zemlji anska sadašnjost, (pp. 134 - 156) Džaja offeres an 7 21 “ [ Besides being God’smen and spreading the eng. Maybe because Herzegovinian man did not have ü enaru ü ko (1971) Katolici u Bosni i Zapadnoj “ in National Security The and Future 3-4 (6) þ ki þ ovjek,nemaju ] ü i svoju vlast,u pitomci ü ko Džaja “. By CEU eTD Collection voditi u konflikte izme vikari su bili biskupi, koji sustolovali u jednom od franjeva Catholicism in Bosniaand Herzegovina 25 [eng. 24 Catholicism in Bosniaand Herzegovina the 19 the electedamongvicaras abishop) apostolic (functioning the Franciscans. provisional solution of creating anApostolic was vicariate implemented in 1735, with an was Franciscan as well. as Franciscan was bishop the wasthat now The difference only conflict. –Franciscans The Bishop an end to put not did this that emphasizes but Bosnia” incentral monasteries in Franciscan seated the of one vicarsasbishops, Herzegovina, with western and whole Bosnia includedthe “[v]icariate end. the in -unsuccessfully them for it claiming tithe the on rights Franciscan challenging kept they significant not so much for its consequences as much as forits sources. 23 “Bariši called so the definitely Croats in B&H and their differing attitudes. The mostimportant one of these is most identity. Even more, events within The Bosnia. Order might shed some mademyth Franciscans of idea Bosnian mainpromoters the national of Croatian one in the light on a division identity national “since as ifittime of existed guardians ever”. This Croatian constructed among same the at became in Bosnia Catholicism of guardians as seen were who Franciscans light religious identity ideas madewith of nationhood Catholics becomeby Croats default. In this Džaja, M., Sre Karamati Džaja, M., Sre Franciscan Province Silver Bosnia th It isIt against background this that the “Bariši Bishops, seated in Bishops, seated modern the of Croatian day city Franciscan history is therefore unavoidable in examining the development of Croatian century.A direct result of the conflict between the bishop-vicar Rafael Bariši 23 ü Because of this continuing conflict between the bishops and the Franciscans, the Franciscans, the and bishops the between conflict continuing this of Because , Marko (1991.) “Franjeva (1991.) Marko , ü ü ko (1997) “Katoli ko (1997) “Katoli ÿ u biskupa-vikara i franjevaca.” 25 þ þ anstvo u Bosni i Hercegovini“, HKD Napredak, Sarajevo: pp. 48 [eng. anstvo u Bosni i Hercegovini“, HKD Napredak, Sarajevo: pp. 40 - 43 [eng. ü Affair” that led to a division within The Order although it is it although Order The within a division to led that Affair” þ ] : “ ] ka provincija Bosna Srebrena“, Franjeva Srebrena“, Bosna provincija ka ] U Vikarijat je uklju 8 þ kih kih samostana u centralnoj Bosni – što ü þ Affair” takesplace inthe 30s and of 40s ena þ itava Bosna i zapadna Hercegovina, a Ĉ akovo did not visitakovo but did not Bosnia þ ki provincijalat, Sarajevo: pp. 9 pp. Sarajevo: provincijalat, ki 24 Džaja notes that the ü e opet ü and the CEU eTD Collection klub Posušje, Zagreb: pp.48 -50; [eng. „Zbornik radova Znanstvenog skupaFra Grgo Marti 27 father Grgo Marti Posušje,Zagreb:pp. 29–30; [eng. traditions, discipline and levels,entrance requirements background. educational probably probably important mostthe element behind the formation of withindifferences Bosnian the expressed during the “Bariši the during expressed radova Znanstvenog skupa Fra Grgo Marti (“Sutješ another from one differentiate to names special coined even and divided were they inside although on it outside the thebrothers seemed of Silver Bosnia livedin harmony, on the that Heshows Kreševo. and Fojnice , in Kraljeva in monasteries centres with between districts three notably Bosnia, Silver of Franciscans among animosities of existence Marti Conference Grgo onfather Bosnia. bishop-vicar support Rafael HerzegovinaBariši Franciscans isHerzegovina. It evidentsomething was on within going Franciscanthe madeOrder that was firstthe visible sign division of thewithin Catholic inBosnia population and 26 (separated from levellater on elevated Bosnian the one) andto in1892. province the of Whatin Order. custody Franciscan establishedhappenedwas is that 1952 Herzegovina Bosnian Franciscan Orderto the Bosnian one. This for change inofficial Churchstructure firstthe time inhistory of the resulted in a change from period was 1843 till in vicariate 1847 when next Herzegovina established apostolic the of the unofficial Franciscan Order wasthesuspension Franciscan the of theSilverprovince inthe Bosnia structure of the Franciscan Džambo, Jozo (1996) “Stolje (1996) Jozo Džambo, Babi ü , Marko , (1996) “Politi Education in combination with the generally inaccessible Bosnian territory in Education Bosnian generallyinaccessible was the with territory combination A possible is explanation offeredby a participant Džambo, of Scientificthe þ ani”, “Kreševljaci” and “Fojni and “Kreševljaci” ani”, ü ] þ ü ke i kulturne prilike u Bosni i Hercegovini u dobaGrge fra Marti e fra. Grge Marti Grge fra. e ü Political and Cultiral circumstances in Bosnia and Herzegovina in time of Affair”. This was, he believes, a result of different monastery aresultdifferent of was,hebelieves, Affair”.This Dichotomyof theworlds of the Franciscans of Silver Bosnia ü that took placetook reveals in1995Zagreb, that Croatia, who the ü i njegovo doba, Zagreb, 8. - 9. studenog 1995.”, Zavi þ ü ani”). Furthermore these differences werepublicly differences these Furthermore ani”). a: Dihotomija svjetova franjevaca Bosne Srebrene“: in Srebrene“: Bosne franjevaca svjetova Dihotomija a: ü i njegovo Zagreb,doba, 8. - 9. studenog 1995.”, Zavi 9 ü against their brother friars againsttheir from 27 ü þ a“: in „Zbornik ajni klubajni ] 26 þ This ajni CEU eTD Collection 30 klub Posušje, Zagreb: pp.51 [eng. dichotomy of Silver Bosnia was not its consequence but most likely the cause. the that argue to is plausible it time, that at been have might Franciscans Bosnian and Bariši Rafael bishop-vicar between the conflict for the reasons Whatever the other. the on different that traditions among existed in Catholics ontheone Bosnia side andHerzegovina effects. These effects, in the form of this new administrative division within The Order, Bariši show “Zbornik radova Znanstvenog skupaFra Grgo Marti on the basis of already existing differences. from tofinally monastery the Herzegovina Franciscans “emancipate (Bosnia)” Kreševo of Herzegovina. The “Barišiin in Franciscan Bosniaand Bosnian anddistinctivenesssense amongOrders uniqueness of monastery a bestVienna. produced Iwould explains argue,different that traditions This, linkedmuch more northern with like centres of university Croatia and parts Zagreb were Franciscans Bosnian hand, other the On Rome. them through and in schools to access had easier also and there population Catholic and cities with Dalmatian contacts 29 cities of Ljubuški, Široki Brijeg, and so on) 28 they leave thus mainof and century the focus chapter. this 19 in the played they role the play again never will they contested never was hood Croatian Bosnia and importance their Herzegovina. Although for preservation Catholicism and of Franciscans sidethe be willof losegradually to pushed andin mainclergy the status the region Dalmatian the bordering Herzegovina, Order. Franciscan Meaning that non-Franciscan bishop was inaugurated was bishop non-Franciscan that Meaning Džambo, Jozo (1996) “Stolje (1996) Jozo Džambo, The Map 1. shows the proximity of Damlatiancoastline and its Herzegovinian hinterland ( valley, ü as its head and is therefore not important because of its content but because of its of because butbecause its of content notimportant asits headandistherefore The “Bariši With official Church hierarchy up inBosnia With Churchhierarchy andset Herzegovina official ü Affair” resulted in a new Bosnian Franciscan province with Rafael with Franciscan inprovince anewBosnian resulted Affair” ü ü e fra. Grge Marti Grge fra. e Affair” was thus seen as a good opportunity on the side of the Dichotomy of worlds ofFranciscans of Silver Bosnia ü a: Dihotomija svjetova franjevaca Bosne Srebrene“: in Srebrene“: Bosne franjevaca svjetova Dihotomija a: ü i njegovo Zagreb,doba, 8. - 9. studenog 1995.”, Zavi 10 28 had relatively stable relatively had ] 30 in 1881, the þ ajni 29 th ü CEU eTD Collection and origins:and Bosnia to 1180 31 answers thequestion didhow in in become Catholics Bosnia Croats andHerzegovina B&H. especially of work the through Bosnian (andFranciscans and some others) thisextentgreat to Austro – Hungarian Empire heavily influenced Catholics in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia. and Serbia from it into mentioned from Bosniawere ratherpoured but asalready to andHerzegovina outside, indigenous in away, not, were however ideas These be Croatian. must Catholic and Serbian between and ethnic groups further on nations. Thepopulation is Orthodox thusnecessarily would link itself Orthodox to Serbia and its movement. movementpopulation while Catholic national Orthodox the Croatiaandits incline towards their constructed nationalseemed identities. would It natural population Catholic the that they ways and Bosnia in population Christian the influenced heavily Empire Austrian National movements, developing in 19 the them. of all linking identity Croatian – Catholic common strong a is) still (and was there Catholic coming population regionalism from strong accompanied by mentalities,distinctive Revival National Croatian 1.2. The national institutions (for example the Croatian Academy for Arts and Science) as well as a as well as Science) and Arts for Academy Croatian the example (for institutions national of a series of the foundation laying down language, for Croatian establishing thestandard important legacies betweenperiod the most 1830’s and1880’s.Some of the epoch this was of a in it place broadly can we ended and started it exactly when regarding agreement no is there – political placecultural andsocio thattook in in Croatia revival 19 the Malcolm, Noel (2002) “Bosnia: A short history“, Pan Macmillan, London: p. 1 – 12; chapter I: Races, myths Croatian National Revival [ “borders” also are groups religious between “borders” means that it In essence It is important to note that above these differences within the Franciscan Order and 31 Development of such a national movement in Croatian parts of cro. Hrvatski Nacionalni Preporod Hrvatskicro. Nacionalni th century in Serbia and the Croatian part of the 11 ] was a long process of long process a ] was th century.Although CEU eTD Collection „Companions of Bosnian History“ and a patron he is regarded by national Croatian historiography as one of the greatest Croats inhistory. Croats 36 greatest ofthe one as historiography Croatian bynational is regarded he apatron and prominent figures in Croatian National Revival Movement. As abishop, theologist, politicion, writer, publicist 35 on Fr. Grgoon Fr. Marti 74 [ skupa Fra Grgo Marti 34 33 64 [eng. skupa Fra Grgo Marti ethnic principle” the whole of Bosnia and Herzegovina would unify Croatia. with unify would Herzegovina theof Bosnia whole and ethnic principle” Croatiaargued that hada“historic right“onTurkish on Bosnia” and expected basisthe that of 32 lands” andmore in weremore publicoften with sphere. proclaimed the Croatian andbefor joined liberated inBosnia “to and wishes theOttoman andEmpire Herzegovina inwas for on Bosnia going everythingthat of Croatian the interest inincreased resulted modern nations. European historiography regards this as period Croatianone inwhichthe nation joined thecompany of science and“system of national values” (in culture,so politics, law, religion,on) administration, education, that set certain outlines of what it means to be a Croat. Croatian a “too Slavish way” under the patronage of the Croatian bishop. in being educated Friars Bosnian that were decided Hungarians in endedon, 1876when goes Josip Juraj Strossmayer period was “themost of arranged education thanksbishop to Bosnian Croatian the of clergy” thatthe 19 indicates friar historians, Ignacije Gavran, Franciscan’s most respected One rule Herzegovina. the of hasalwaysbeen and history Bosnia education the of outside in Catholics and TheBosnia history of Herzegovina. education friarsyoungof under Turkish educated of ideas promulgated by Croatian National Movement. It seems clear that the that seems clear It Movement. National by Croatian ideas promulgated of educated Gavran, Ignacije (2010) „”Suputnici bosanske povijesti“, Svjetlo rije Josip Juraj Strossmayer was a Croatian bishop of bishop a Croatian was Strossmayer Juraj Josip Koruni Ibid. Pp. 68 Koruni eng. “Friar Grgo Marti Already some of the first leaderslike Already somefirst of count of movement, this the JankoDraškovi Once again, Franciscans hold the key to answer how these ideas were transferred to transferred were ideas these how answer to key the hold Franciscans again, Once Dichotomy of worlds ofFranciscans of Silver Bosnia ü ü , Petar, (1996) “Fra. Grgo Marti , Petar, (1996) “Fra. Grgo Marti ü and his era“ ü ü i njegovo doba,Zagreb, 8.- 9. studenog 1995.”,Zavi i njegovo doba,Zagreb, 8.- 9. studenog 1995.”,Zavi ü and Croatian National Movement” in “Collection of paper of Scientific conference 35 whoinvited Franciscans togeteducation in his hediocese. This, 32 ] ] ü ü i Hrvatski Nacionalni Pokret“: in “Zbornik radova Znanstvenog i Hrvatski Nacionalni Pokret“: in “Zbornik radova Znanstvenog Ĉ akovo (city in region) and one of the most ofthe one and region) Slavonia in (city akovo 12 ] þ i, Sarajevoi, – Zagreb, pp126 – 128 [ þ þ 36 ajni klub Posušje, Zagreb: pp.69 - ajni klub Posušje, Zagreb: pp.59 - In Croatia Franciscans were 34 th century 33 This eng. ü , CEU eTD Collection 38 37 BosniaThe Austro –Hungarian (Bulgaria, Albania,Montenegro, Serbia, and Herzegovina). Empirelonger could no copewith numbers increasing the of inrebellions its landsEuropean andcalled“robbers” gendarme attacking army posts positions. – Hungarian beHerzegovina arrival Austro so even confirmed will after the army of the with brutal measures taxes increased by which provoked authorities. the low income crop fleeing Christian started peasants into the mountainsavoid to paying secondthe half of (traditionally) century. Inthemid70’sinhighland the dueto Herzegovina, century 20th ofthe experience 1.3. The remained. (previously mentioned) between differences parts two the of samethe Orderand people unity national Croatian idea basedamong andadvocated all onreligion/ethnicity, Croats Bosnian flock with if both the together supported and Herzegovinian Franciscans their even However, them. over authority having and them protecting often them, for caring them, hugeimpact on their and population how andothers by they themselves perceived educating they is did.home. exactly This what ideas the young friarsHungarian “too Slavish” these wereunhappywith national) Croatian authorities (meaning were exposed to and were afraid that they might spread them back Ibid. pp.138 - 139 Malcolm, Noel (2002) “Bosnia: A short history“, Pan Macmillan, London: pp. 132 By the end of the 80’s of the 19 entered anarchicthecountry as more more and in becoming B&Hwas The situation There is no doubt that Franciscan “Ujaci” [ “Ujaci” Franciscan that doubt no is There th century it was clear to everyone that the Ottoman 13 eng. Uncles 38 37 This rebellious of nature ] inB&Hdidhave a CEU eTD Collection Herzegovian regional belonging as its framework.“ its as belonging regional Herzegovian 42 framework.“ its as belonging “... minister Benjamin Kallay advocated forcreation of distinct nation, with Bosnian-Herzegovian regional rije 41 40 Malcolm, Noel (2002) “Bosnia: A short history“, Pan Macmillan, London: pp. 136 - Berlin. 138 in Congress the after 1878 in all for occurred of B&H occupation ofSerbia The more. even them desirability worried Slavs and South strength the increasing thus and rule Serbian under coming B&H of possibility the However, rule. Hungarian weaken and Empire the within corpus Slav the strengthen would this was concern 39 oppression that Serbian and dissatisfaction nourishedin general was It centralism. Serbian of policies Muslims) a sense of unity among Croats of willSerbia. The disappointment onlylater with andcome unpopular (among Croats (Catholics) and Kingdom the a with and unification for secession opted in and 1918 together The Empire came good part of the Kneževi father Anto notably friars, Herzegovinian) among appeared in butinvention period (not Bosnian pre-occupation the 20 early the in abandoned was and success much andCroats Serbs livingoutside Bosnia andHerzegovina. from identity, different nation distinct with as a separate (“Bosnianism”) “bošnjaštvo” of intheidea Kallay, minister chargeofBosnia, theMonarchy’s invention. Benjamin advocated is that moreidea one widelydepending appeared asanAustrian on circumstances, regarded not onlythe butwere joinedones, by a Muslim National inOrganization 1906. different nationalist ideas society in20 heterogeneous already of beginning the and its political parties. Among these, CroatianTurkish Bosnian vilayet. and Serbian were reluctantly make and,although ready of Empire use was this to Ibid. pp. 60 - 61: „... minister Benjamin Kallay advocated for creation of distinct nation, with Bosnian- Karamati Ibid. pp. 151 main Their rule. its under Slavs more of including afraid Empire of the part Hungarian the particularly was It þ i, Sarajevo:i, pp60 [eng. Under Austro – Hungarian rule and the experience of war’s misery, all South Slavs of withTogether ideas,these nationalistthree strength varied history whose through As history will show on many occasions, Bosnia and Herzegovina as the most ü , Marko (1992.) “Franjevci BosneSrebrene uvrijeme austrougarska uprave 1878 – 1914, Svjetlo Franciscans of Silver Bosnia under Austro-Hungarian administration 1878 –1914 ü . 42 14 th century it was not in fact an Austrian th century, was the main “battlefield” of century, wasthe main“battlefield” 41 Although ideathis yield didnot 39 , to take over control of 40 See ]: CEU eTD Collection only present day partday only agood of intheWest)butalso present Croatia (with exception the of agreement“ The newly established unit was named „ Hrvatska“ namedunitwas The newlyestablished 47 question” failed in 1934 inMarseille. dictatorship and abolition of nationally colored administrativethe for divisionof solution theThe state. This attemptsessions. to solveproblem was“the first Parliamentary implemented from by the withdrawing King MPs himself withCroatian introductionin of, resulted already often mentioned,and personal Yugoslavia of acquiring large autonomy forCroatian lands. The conflict produced almost constant tensions in politicalYugoslvia (1918 system- 1941).Against the ’s centralist concept Zagreb opposed federal its concept aimed at 46 day. present till contested remains “famous” of victims most the numbers as exact The one. Jasenovac with camps of concentration ofnumber establishment was aim ofsuch result The obstacle. biggest their as Herzegovina and Bosnia Croatia, in lived that Serbs the saw and Croatia, "pure" ethnically at an aimed Ustaše The Partisans. the by destroyed eventually and expelled, defeated, were Ustaše and their leader .As German forces withdrew fromYugoslavia in 1945, the NDH” [ ofCroatia State Independent called state of apuppet leader installed „“ in in Marseille 1934andmanyin effectopenedagree this space for solving socalled the who's leadership Croatia would suffer tragedy war. in tragedy theupcoming suffer would Croatia leadershipwho's hence “ hence Croatian radical movements, especially to „Ustaše“ and their leader, Ante Paveli Ante leader, their and „Ustaše“ to especially movements, radical Croatian time. first in dictatorship January 1929 and thename name asofficial state Yugoslavia appearedfor the banned in theKingdom of Yugoslavia. Their comesname was from Croatian thus the and word “ state Croatian independent an create to sought movement separatist anti-Yugoslav and fascist 45 HSS) that managed to attract Croatian voters of all profiles. HSS was often seen not only as a national party but party a national as only not alsoseen as a national often movementwas HSS and Stjepan profiles. Radi of all voters Croatian attract to managed that HSS) 48 King Kara As Aleksandar in aresult Parliament. assassinated Radi 44 43 increasing in escalated and Radi 1928 when Stjepan Muslims instate and Herzegovina againstcentral the Bosnia and Serbs. The “Croatian question” refers to the battling between the two concepts of Yugoslav state in the first the in state ofYugoslav two concepts the between battling the to refers question” “Croatian The TheUstaše movement was founded in1929 by Croatian right-wing politician Ante Paveli To see the map of the „Banovina Hrvatska“ go to Appendix 2 Appendix to go Hrvatska“ „Banovina ofthe map the see To Stjepan Radi Stjepan Malcolm, Noel (2002)“Bosnia: A short history“,Macmillan, Pan London: pp. 161 -167 Dragiša Cvetkovi ü 's death in 1928. ] who’s military formations collaborated with the Axis troops infighting against the resistance forces, the ustaše” The solution finally camein well known„Cvetkovi form the of the The king's dictatorship did not solve much and actually gave some stimulation to stimulation some gave actually and much solve not did dictatorship king's The 47 ü would mean insurgents, or rebels. After the German , Ante Paveli in 1939 under which Croatia wasgranted wide autonomy within the Kingdom. was a leader of main Croatian party called Croatian Peasent Party (Hrvatska selja (Hrvatska Party Peasent Croatian called party Croatian of main aleader was ü was the new Yugoslav prime minister and Vladko Ma 46 in Kingdom the of Yugoslavia. ü as national leader. 15 ü 44 cro. “Nezavisna Država Hrvatska – Hrvatska Država “Nezavisna cro. , the Croatian national leader,was national , the Croatian ÿ 48 or þ ek was the new leaderof HSS after and its territory included and its not territory ÿ evi 45 ü ustati The king was murdered was Theking introduced his personal introduced 43 ” meaning "to rise", meaning ” The tensions were Thetensions ü . It was aCroatian þ ü ka stranka - stranka ka –Ma ü , under , ü was þ ek CEU eTD Collection Brijeg, Herzegovina. Brijeg, through figures like Ministerof Defense of Republic of (MORH)Croatia Bosnia Gojko from Šušak who those was from ofRHthan Široki politics on influence much more exercised Croats Herzegovina that accepted to „abandon“ parts of Bosnia show that they were aware of differences among Croats on the field. It is widely 53 52 and The Future 3-4 (6), pp. 37 – 86 [ 51 50 49 inB&H. corpus national theCroatian within differences it,emerged sealed of asaresult that agendas political and state Bosnian the of future the on views different the did so differences, ethnic/religious it. of aware well were elites political Croatian and ready setand already was Herzegovina inBosniaand Croats among of differences stage ( Union Democratic Croatian the of emergence also played a role in its consolidation.these differences In the wakewere factdifferent backgrounds. Thediffering that historical and thatrefer cultural to mentalities of notedthe Yugoslav from outsidesecession (by wars the and Yugoslav the Communist meaningregion it wasmorerepressive. state for example) in Croats Herzegovina Yugoslavia treated wayCommunist the severely affected Bosnia. This in experiencefrom different their from hadarather Franciscans counterparts Herzegovina “ NDH” Bosnia. Northern with Croatia bemorewas unified precise, B&H partof that To the day present and Herzegovina. Bosnia was Western Herzegovina and some parts of Central and (small parts of) ý The fact that leadership of Republic of Croatia (RH) opted for secession of Herzegovina region and was ready was and region of Herzegovina secession for opted (RH) Croatia of of Republic leadership that fact The Ibid. pp. 54 - 58 Lu See footnote 45 Malcolm, Noel (2002) “Bosnia: A short history“, Pan Macmillan, London: pp. 171 - 172 etnik þLü ] Herzegovina was, unlike Bosnia, put in zone. Italian the occupational put unlikeBosnia, ] Herzegovina was, , Ivo (2005) “Ima li Hercegovine? (Tko i zašto negira Hercegovinu i Hercegovce?)”National in Security This contributed even more to development of distinctive identities backed my backed development evenmore identities of to distinctive This contributed As part of the Independent State of Croatia s” movement from Eastern Herzegovina particularly active in this region, Croats and Croats region, inthis active particularly Herzegovina from Eastern movement s” 49 These parts will remain under Zagreb's was annexed to Croatia. eng. Who and why denies Herzegovina and Herzegovinians? 52 16 53 HDZ- HrvatskaDemokratskaZajednica) HDZ- Just as war sealed the differences based on 50 [ cro. “Nezavisna Država Hrvatska – 51 With Serbian ] (pp. 45) the CEU eTD Collection Imamovi Mustafa followeddivision. ethnic of line the Unsurprisingly disagreement the started. actually future of B&H (then federal still longbefore wasobvious warhad of the the unitYugoslavia) 55 54 was confirmedthe when other, the on Croat and and Bosniak side one onthe representatives beginning of was what to follow. Alreadyin November 1991,division among Serb although part of governing coalition undermining started state institutions. This wasonly the Serbs, Bosnian representing party the Party), Democratic (Serb SDS that Herzegovina started. the already side had other on country restof the the the self - proclaimed “Serbian Autonomous Regions” on one side, and Croats and Bosniacsin on April its Herzegovina international between received inrecognition 6 1992,conflict Serbs and Bosnia time the By Army. National Yugoslav the of members biased and militia by independence was Serbian (February referendum 29 andMarch 11992)which obstructed JuneYugoslavia on italmosta yeartook 251991, for Bosnia toorganize an and Herzegovina and the Muslim – Croat war in early 1993 of wouldthis be theestablishmentof “Croatthe Community Herceg –Bosna”of inmid 1992 result devastating most The ways. different in reality view they that showed in Bosnia Croats and Herzegovina in Croats elimination, (physical) of threat same and enemy common a with facedengulfed country.the Even though and their warthat the the1990’s during differences Yugoslavia upof break 1.4. The For more details see: Malcolm, Noel (2002) “Bosnia. A short History“, Pan Books, Malcolm, London, Noel pp. (2002) 213 “Bosnia:- 233 A short history“, Pan Macmillan, London: pp. 241 - 249 That there had been no consensus among the Bosnian political elite regarding the regarding elite political Bosnian the among been noconsensus had That there History will give Croats in Bosnia and Herzegovina one more chance to demonstrate inmore to chance History andHerzegovina one Bosnia Croats will give After two federal from After and two declared Croatia wereseceding they units, , ü notes that it was already after the first democratic elections in Bosnia and inBosnia democratic elections it first was already the that after notes 54 . 17 55 CEU eTD Collection realization of planof the carving territory ofB&Hwas by out that heavily supported the white check board in the(HRK - Kuna) was introduced as wellmiddle as the Croatian national flag (red, white, blue with red – as a coat of arms). Many saw this as a first step towards Herceg – Bosna” Herceg in Herzegovina wasestablished July 1992 andwas Community given name“Croat the of FranjoTu by president Croatian overlooked aprocess Croat, Boban,aHercegovinian Mate replaced by build up. there witnessed the establishment of “Serbian Autonomous Regions” as well as its military the borders in borders the former)of republics. However, January 1992 Kulji all Yugoslav (already the war against Muslims in . Central in Muslims against war the often and majority predominant no constituted majority never at all. but It is resided known Croats that for where example Bosnia Croats inof Central Northern areas Bosnia into in the Posavinaterritory region neversupported extent, it imitated the Bosnian part of the borders of the “Banovina Hrvatska”. Later on, it will tend to expand59 its 58 57 „Magistrat“ Sarajevo, Sarajevo, pp. 386 56 Srpska would survivethewarform ina legalized the of (byDayton Treaty)named entity formedB&H, against idea ofanindependent the regions, self-proclaimed Herzegovina. Those and Bosnia state: recognized internationally then the of territory the within formed parliamentary session as a sign of protest. “Memorandum of Independence” was passed and representatives of SDS left the Herceg – Bosna occupied areas in Western Herzegovina where Croats were predominant majority. To agreat To majority. predominant were Croats where Herzegovina inWestern areas occupied Bosna – Herceg Ibid. pp. 232 Malcolm, Noel (2002) “Bosnia: A short history“, Pan Macmillan, London: pp. 232 Imamovi . The Croatian to“Serbiancounterpart Autonomous Regions” in and Bosnia Croats in B&H, under the leadership of Kulji in leadershipof Croats Stjepan the B&H, under On March 27, 1992, the already mentioned “Serbian Autonomous Regions” Autonomous mentionedwere On March27,1992,thealready “Serbian 57 58 ü ÿ , Mustafa (2006) “Bosnia and Herzegovina: Evolution of Its Political and Legal Institutions”, man.be To from Herzegovina atthat time meantbeingmore hard-line Croats since 59 . Although itwas marked asaprovisional solution, Croatian currency 56 18 ü were in favour of of preserving wereinfavour Republika ü was CEU eTD Collection 64 Noel (2002) “Bosnia: A short history“, Pan Macmillan, London: pp. 247 - 248 be would that cantons) (or ethnicly labeledprovinces whichwould sparkof autonomous competition betweencreation Croats proposed and They Bosniacs in CentralHerzegovina. Bosnia. and Bosnia in 63 668 [ 62 61 second most powerful man after president Tu 60 sign from “outside”. who Šušak’sidea“rational would have ifhehadopportunist” accepted a been positive given presidentTu clear butisMalcolm suggests Noel not not supported ideaor this Tu born of adviser president Herzegovinian exchange for Herzegovina (Herceg -Bosna). for Herzegovina(Herceg exchange consistentlacked command high Croatian the believed who Bosnia policiesin Northern commanders Croatian towards B&H and strongly believed this region was given to Serbs in Bosnia wasin progress. Bosnia besieged Muslim forces in Gornji Vakuf and by April the same year afull scale war in Central that war between Bosniacs and Croats broke out in Central Bosnia. In early 1993 Croat forces the enemies and who the allieswere. the who enemiesand the who of notions and experiences different significantly accumulated Croats of group different saying says: “You couldn’t asan and old everyone fighting was everyone of Herzegovina and Bosnia whole territory tell who is drinking andBosnia and Sarajevo, Croats andwho Bosniacs continued to fight sideis by side. At this point, on paying”.the By the end as local monthsregarded in onlyallies few population Croatian before. Meanwhile, Northern of the war the soldiers that fighting with and minority) engaged were the Croats (where Bosnia Central Malcolm, Noel (2002) “Bosnia: A short history“, Pan Macmillan, London: pp. 248 - 249 war ofthe settlement a political for proposal detailed 1992 October in proposed Vance Cyrus Owen and Lord Zovak, Jerko (2009) “Rat u Bosanskoj Posavini 1992“ , Posavska Hrvatska d.o.o., Malcolm, Slavonski Noel Brod, (2002) pp. “Bosnia: 663 - A short history“, Pan Macmillan, London: pp. 241 Gojko Šušak at that time served as Defense Minister of Republic of Croatia and was regarded in public as the eng. „The War in The Bosnian region 1992“ It is against this background as well as in the light of plan –Owen peace light of Vance the asinthe backgroundis aswell It this against As a result forces from Herzegovina (with predominant Croatian majority) entered Croatian (with from predominant forcesAs aresult Herzegovina 61 A similar hypothesis was also presented by Jerko Zovak, one of the 64 ÿ man. ÿ 62 man,GojkoŠušak 19 ] 60 . WhetherTu president See Malcolm, ÿ man a was ÿ man 63 CEU eTD Collection in B&H (mostly to those living in neighboring region of Herzegovina) that they will soon be part of Republic of ofRepublic be part soon will Croatia. they that Herzegovina) of region in neighboring living those to B&H (mostly in 70 , Carter, Charles K. (2001) “Toward Peace in Bosnia”, Lynne Rienner Publishers– 20 billionInc. $worth assets, destroyed,London90% unemployment …Data beenhave taken from: Cousens, Elizabeth M. 69 The Treaty: together with AlijaIzebegovi with The Treaty: together Tu in B&H in conflict wasaparty Croatia Republic of war the end of 1995. It was, however, formally formally signed however, Itwas, 1995. in reachedNovember (Ohio) nearDayton is agreement peace the in andHerzegovina Bosnia air strikes against Bosnian Serb forces in 1995. became the only option mainly thanks to American diplomat and NATO 68 TKD Šahinpaši Pejanovi Professor to According interference. its strong without be achieved not would peace realize community international made the that Srebrenica internationalwasWar not pressure.Ituntil thanksto1995and eventsin horrible ended: the 67 66 „Magistrat“ Sarajevo,Sarajevo, 389pp. - 392 Croatia. of Republic and formed Federation newly the between talksconfederation of idea of secession fromsignificant amount of Croats inBosnia Herzegovina with The Agreement sinceit meant the end an to and Herzegovina.Although peace was restored in Central Bosnia, it is easy imagineto theThe disappointment of the only consolation forces. alliance againstSerb of asaform Agreement) (Washington Bosnia and Herzegovina could have been the 65 Tu … a party that implemented policies of divisionof Bosnia and Herzegovina giving false hope to many Croats War left50% over of Bosnianthe population displaced,over 250000 dead or missing,200 000 wounded , 15 As I already mentioned earlier, The Treaty was signed by Alija Izetbegovi Pejanovi Malcolm, Noel (2002) “Bosnia: A short history“, Pan Macmillan, London: pp. 257 - 258 Imamovi ÿ ÿ man. man man and Izetbegovi The Dayton Treaty, officially known as The General Framework Agreement for Peace Agreement Framework as The General known officially Treaty, The Dayton The war in entire Bosnia and Herzegovina ended in the same way endedin Muslim –Croat way same The that inBosnia Herzegovina the and war entire The andwar between BosniacsCroats ended on March 18,1995after presidents ü ü , Mirko (2007) “The Political Development of Bosnia and Herzegovina in The Post-Dayton Period“, Post-Dayton inThe Herzegovina and ofBosnia Development Political “The (2007) Mirko , , Mustafa (2006) “Bosnia and Herzegovina: Evolution of Its Political and Legal Institutions, ü , Sarajevo, pp.41 69 in Bosnia andin Herzegovina.If anyone early 1995 still doubted thethat ü agreed under international pressure to establish the Federation establishof Federation the to international pressure under agreed 68 ü in Paris on December 14 1995,which marked the (from B&H, representing Bosniacs) andSlobodan Bosniacs) B&H, (from representing 20 67 70 , one should look at the signatures on ü , Slobodan Miloševi ü , the peaceful solution peaceful , the ü and Franjo 66 65 CEU eTD Collection 72 London, pp. 27 71 intention of itputting to some specific use)hadmuch morematerial manipulate. to the with (always construction identity (national) in involved who those experience, different of subjects wereoften Croats and Herzegovinian Croats Bosnian Since circumstances. and events of actual as may be) they (asdistorted interpretations of specific out constructed in residingis one’sidentity it Asmuch Herzegovina isand Bosnia. as constructed always those of (etc.) mentality specific and conditions life experience, historical different by in B&H hadbeenconditioned Croats among in attitudes differences that demonstrated chapter in today and B&Hoperate Croatian population live,on future.the andreflect perceive This from outside with results that are hardly bright. compromise” calledis acoerced better what butwith stalemate hurting end mutually with not “war did that war”and the in ending role acritical played coercion “(…) that argue Carter and Cousens and not the leader of Croats in B&H ? were acting on their own, one has to wonder why was The Treaty signed by president Tu Miloševi notfounded on consensus but rather on two entities absence any of kind of consensus. Itis crucial see to that Bosnia and Herzegovina as astate is presidentFranjo Tu See Appendix 4 for a map of the two entities established by the DaytonTreaty. Cousens, Elizabeth M. , Carter, Charles K. (2001) “Toward Peace in Bosnia”, Lynne RiennerPublishers Inc. , It isIt backgroundwith historical this and framework such within that Croatian elites a involved. parties the was forced onto peace the it obvious that was endedThe but war ü (Serbia), there stood the proof of Croatia’s interference – the signature of of Croatia’s signature –the interference of proof the Croatia’s stood there (Serbia), 71 . In the same way political elites are still being forced to cooperate inthe cooperate to forced being still are elites political way same the In . ÿ man. in If Croats Herzegovina (“Croat Community of Herceg –Bosna”) 21 72 inlatent conflict suppressedbypressure ÿ man CEU eTD Collection 74 73 and clarify.present to aims chapter this which Herzegovina, and Bosnia for specific basis, new this is precisely It basis. different Catholics of B&Hidentities. becamereligious different Croats and remained in identities Herzegovina were and Bosnia national the basis”for only“real notices, differing such till the presentidentity as differentdayfrom those of theiralbeit fellow Serb and Bosniac citizens. As Noel Malcolmperhaps on their reality be can and perceptions manipulated. perceive way people of the aresult instead are They and touchable. visible something real, is not given and plain. Brubaker shows that ethnicity and other forms of groupness are not where Brubaker emphasizes thatnogroup is 100percenthomogenous and “groupness” that issues.important basis The general for this is chapter in“Ethnicity provided without Groups” there be such a distinctiveway(s) national identity Croatian formed itself in it for arecrucial understandinghow can contrast in attitudes and the Bosnia particularity of andHerzegovina be Furthermore, should general presented. of members of on few HerzegovinaCroatian andoffering facts in possible explanations, identity national the same national corpus on CHAPTER II – The Faces of and Herzegovina. Bosnia in experience “Croatian” of particularity the and identity national Croatian day present Malcolm, Noel (2002) “Bosnia: A short history“, Pan Macmillan, London: pp. 166 Brubaker, Rogers (2004) “Ethnicity without Groups”, Harvard University Press, Cambridge Two main topics will be covered by this chapter: the crucial differences in 19 crucial the differences by chapter: mainthis be covered will Two topics inThere isCroats nodoubt that Bosnia andHerzegovinanational recognize their focusingBefore on in differences the amongattitudes Croats of Bosnia and 74 Consequently, on the basis of sharing the same religion, same the sharing of basis the on Consequently, 22 73 th and CEU eTD Collection ruled Croatia as well. 76 75 is Herzegovina, there Catholics nothingthat would from indicate lessB&H felt Croat. and Bosnia from Croats/Catholics with coming were that elements” “oriental those all the19 of B&H,animosity discloses in CatholicsCroatia. living as those members of samenational group the become B&H of Catholics that implied been also has It Order. Franciscan influential of in impact through Bosniaits work Croats the on Herzegovina and been as well emphasized as has identity national Croatian of establishment the for movement the of importance historical 19 the of half first in the feelings national Croatian sparked that movement 19 2.1. The Croatia and B&H. better This understanding a will provide in of identity,of nature the national Croatian both willdeal ispreciselywhatthismay haveThechapter ofthewith. reality perception thought. inwhat andsomeone Zagreb mattered not that is itreality of theperception Brubaker notes, as official as in official language Stephan’s lands underSt. all crown impose Hungarian to ‘s attempt Budapest . from to Carpathians state Hungarian Hungarian nobility and Hungariannational movement waspushing that for theidea of to form resistance of wasa movement Revival Croatian that indicates clearly well. Goldstein St.Stephan's crownwas crownof Hungarian kings (title Hapsburg’s sinceheld 1527) who in 19th century Lovrenovi Although Ivan Lovrenovi providedPrevious chapter some information basic Revival” on “National the As many other, the 19 the other, many As ü , Ivan (2002) “Bosanski Hrvati“, Durieux, Zagreb, pp. 8 – 9 [ th century Croatian National Movement National Croatian century th century Croatian nationalist movement was reactionary as reactionary was movement nationalist Croatian century ü , the authority on the question of the identity of Croats in th century Croats and Croatian Revival movement towards 23 76 eng. Theeng. Bosnian Croats produced fierce produced in opposition th century. The ] 75 As CEU eTD Collection language. 81 80 Belgrade (the centralist one) are not the topic of this chapter but it is useful to keep it in mind. 79 78 “Language, Nation, and State. Identity Politics in aMultilingual Age.“, New Palgrave,York, pp. 215-230 (2004) “Unity and Plurality in theSerbo-Croatian Linguitsic Sphere“ in Judit, Tony,Lacorne Denis (eds.): meaning but in other two dialects) „ and dialect, „kaj“ to opposed as native „what“ meaning to 2/5 („što“ of Croats, „Štokavian“ was it end, thatIn the was used dialects. three as a norm. See. Garde, Paul 77 state and one political body – Croats of Austro–Hungarian Empire. samethe problems. Asa nationalresult, identity Croatian now taking was form within one sharing framework andmeant of AustroCroats –Hungarian which same political Empire the state. Slav South large one into Serbia joining of idea the and nationalism Croatian the Croatia of andin ina modern and endresultedcreation the the standardized powerful tool in fighting regionalisms of Slavonia, Dalmatia, Dubrovnik, Istria and Bosnia. state. in a common be materialized was to that solidarity Slav South “Illirian element but Movement”thus muchwith strong success though.of Croatian remained spread Sloveneattemptto ideas their national to andSerbian without territory which was National Revival name: Movement”.a neutral “Illirian using This their demonstrate was to Croats of Bosnia and Herzegovina and Croats in Croatia shared the same state. Yugoslavia), brake the From year(all Socialist on way the upof into Herzegovinathis 1878. Bosniaand occupy army Turkish Austro-Hungarian forto be incentivethe apowerful fears of Thiswith Kingdom to worst of the Budapest. Serbia wasone Vienna proved of and has already been mentioned in previous unificationchapter, of SlavEmpire’s South lands Goldstein, Ivo (1999) “Croatia: A History“,C. Hurst & Co. London,Ltd., pp. 61 Yugoslavia [cro. Jugoslavija] means literary “the land of SouthSlavs“. and one) federal (the Zagreb from promulgated state Slav South of such concepts conflicting) (and Different Goldstein, Ivo (1999) „Croatia: A History“, C.Hurst & Co. Lonodn,Ltd., pp. 60 - 62 has that language Croatian of the standardization the for acall as started actually movement Revival Croatian From 1878 on, Croats of same bordersFrom with other B&H found1878 on,within themselves Croats It is fair to claim that Hungarian nationalism greatly contributed to the development of development the to contributed greatly nationalism Hungarian that claim to fair is It In the light of a “pushy” Hungarian nationalism, Croat public figures at first named the 78 24 80 It also proved to be a ü a“ with a same with a“ 77 Croatian 79 As it As 81 CEU eTD Collection 83 203 soon have to wage. For more see Goldstein, Ivo (1999) “Croatia: A History“, C.Hurstanniversary & Co. Ltd.,of the London,Battle of pp. Kosovo. He used the example of Kosovo Battle to describe the battle(s) Serbia will strong defensive mode and helped it momentum. gain in 19 the South Slav state. Croats living within national identity was nationalism;developing Hungarian against the 2.it wasdeveloping among borders of one state; and 3. with the aim of establishing one large 82 up topreviously sphere. in established animosities public Miloševi 2.2. Particularities Particularities of the 20 2.2. above. presented identity just three keypoints leaningparticularities day Croatian onto move of present to split in inamong attitudes Croats andHerzegovina ThisBosnia occurred. cannow chapter some helpsdidhow To usunderstand this extent weredramatically different. circumstances nationalism awakening of these Croatian thewake ofbreak new Yugoslavia and up of and portray Croats as the history reinterpretof to Serbian writers this intheattempt Goldsteinnationprimarily seescausesof with “genocidal nature”Croatian [ nationalism resurfaced as a response to events in Serbia and . Goldstein, Ivo (1999) “Croatia: A History“, C.Hurst & Co. London,Ltd., pp. 199 - 204 One of the best examples of such threats can be found in Miloševi in be found can threats ofsuch examples best ofthe One It was important to explain these early developments to show that unity among Croats among unity that show to developments early these explain to important was It Three key shouldpoints bein emphasized here: 19 1. As opposed to being a reaction to Hungarian nationalism in19 beingto areaction to As opposed ü th and (in)direct threats he made in his speeches on numerous occasions numerous on hein hisspeeches made threats and(in)direct and early 20 th century was conditioned by certain historical circumstances. In the In circumstances. historical by certain conditioned was century th Croatian National Movement 25 ü 83 's speech he delivered in 1989 on the 600th onthe 1989 in delivered he speech 's This put Croatian nationalism in a in nationalism Croatian put This cro. genocidniHrvati th and early 20 th century, present day century, present th century Croatian 82 ]. Slobodan onlyadded CEU eTD Collection emphasizedin 1990’s identity that national Croatian in (unlike 19 experiences moreit detail willhere chapters different and will provide be only on these following The ways. in different Yugoslavia experiencing basically were and authorities inWithinunits. todifferentpolitical Croats andB&Hweresubjects Yugoslavia Croatia opposed 1990sarrivedto that, livingin with Croats inone Yugoslavia butfederal different livingamong Croats withinborders the of state: theAustro-Hungarianone As Empire. side, and Croats and Bosniacs in the rest of the country on the other side had already been in been already had side other the on country the of rest in the Bosniacs and Croats and side, one onthe Regions” Autonomous “Serbian in -proclaimed Serbs between self the conflict timeits Bosnia April international received and Herzegovina recognition on 6 1992,the independence finally referendum. happenedon This February March 29 and 1 1992.By the JuneYugoslavia on italmosta yeartook 251991, for Bosnia toorganize an and Herzegovina between Republicborder Croatia Herzegovina. of and Bosnia and (between (between 19 nationalsame. Croatian identity onecommon enemy again.against unified once Similarities Serbian and not Hungarian19 although to compared nationalism its Therefore, federal borders. inner for regardless Croats of factor provided the cohesion effects for Croats in population of these felt by mostrepublics endangered Serbiannationalism.rising This Croatia and B&H were mentionedHerzegovina wereoften grabs, asupfor itissurprising that non-Serbian not the However, Croatiaonly consideringterritories of Croats. that Bosniaand and Croatia and After two federal from After and two declared Croatia wereseceding they units, Slovenia, in 19 the earlier, As emphasized Messages coming from Belgrade influenced all, then still Yugoslav, republicsandnot th and 20 th century) however endthere. however century) th century, modern Croatian nationalism gained incentive from incentive gained nationalism Croatian modern century, th century Croatian national identity was developing was identity national Croatian century 26 th century) was cut by a CEU eTD Collection 86 identity dedicated a one whole chapter of his book historical “the identity his book on Croatian Croatian of aonewholededicated chapter to one last thing on thenature of identity Croatian inthe generalshould beoutlined. Bellamy chapter. fourth the in will be in dealt with loyal be B&Hanswereddifferently Why Croats andto? Herzegovina mustCroat hadwhich have asked him/herself should in to probably: was state Croats Bosnia each questions that important visible. Oneofmost areclearly the sovereign countries different republic within Yugoslav Federation. in 20 favour of one South Slav state (which at that time meant unification with Kingdom of Serbia), continuity of depolitization movement focusesmovement its on aim. in19 Unlike Pravni fakultet Sveu fakultet Pravni BiH: ustavni položaj, kulturni razvoj i nacionalni identitet“, Centar za demokraciju i pravo Miko Tripalo and establishing (one of of sourcesattitudes (one the) establishing of of inCroatian different polity B&H. in important prove will this and countries different two from operated now movement national members of Croatian political longerlived same in clear bearguedlater, this andthe country asitnot will tosome was elites both in Croatia and Bosnia (…)”. and Croats and Serbs Muslims, andpeoples: of citizens state the Herzegovina. Croatian for voted Herzegovinaindependent “(…) Herzegovina, and sovereign and RepublicBosnia of 85 84 progress. Goldstein, Ivo (1999) “Croatia: A History“, C.Hurst & Co. London,Ltd., pp. 203 - 205 Komši Malcolm, Noel (2002) “Bosnia. A short History“, Pan Books, London, p. 213 - 233 th ] century it was quite clear that aim is independent state or at least highly oratleast highly autonomous state independent isaim that quite itclear was century Before movingBefore some to particularities of Croatian identity in and Bosnia Herzegovina, Possible complexitiesmight that emerge outof such aim with Croats living intwo It was confirmed in March 1992 that Croats (as inIt wasconfirmed March1992thatCroats 19 opposed to The last point regarding differences of of 19 regardingpointThe last differences ü , Ivo, (2010) “Ustavnopravni položaj Hrvata nakon Daytona –kontinuitet depolitizacije“ in“Hrvati u 84 According to the results of the referendum almost all Croats in Bosnia and þ ilišta u Zagrebu, Zagreb pp. 7-21 [eng. 7-21 pp. Zagreb uZagrebu, ilišta in „Croats in B&H: constitutional status.Cultural development and national 86 th century in century Croatian when leadersspoke political 27 Constitutional status of Croats after Dayton – th and 20 th century national Croatian century 85 th century experience) no experience) century CEU eTD Collection “Samobitnost” in direct translation would “essentiality”). therefore (meaning be something“bitnost“ and like “self“) “self-essentiality”. (meaning “samo“ words oftwo comprises “samobitnost“ translated to English so the “identity“ is used since its meaning is the closest to „samobitnost“. The word 90 and explanations of specific words will be provided in footnotes inserted in the English translation immediately.version of the text of the preamble in Croatian will be provided in the end. Where of the linguistic constructionsneeded, (because additional heused newly „invented“ words) translationshe used are hard to translate an original statehood throughout history, starting with the 7 portion of the preamble (stillmirrored in of preamble The Croatian passedConstitution onChristmas in 1990. Ahuge part of the Constitution) consists of listingstate. independent an on proofsright of Croatian them. asa are This was presented key Croats that prove distinctive legitimate nation and have (alleged arrival of Croats) till the present day there was some form of a sovereign state linking 89 Manchester and New York, pp. 32 - 40 88 Serbian are practically none existent and to talk about two different cultures would also be pushing it too far. 87 established Kingdom preservation ninthcentury; the The inthetenth century;Croats The of in principalities mediaeval seventh of state The independent century; the Croatia in founded nationCroatian the of right historic the of tothought state-founding of fulldevelopment and maintenance national forms in and the eventsthevarious state historical sequence of inatotal people, confirmed sovereignty, which was (is) evident in: The creation of Croatian On the other hand, in thefocus suchof discourse were attempts to prove that since 7 importance. secondary of always were but discourse nationalist in appear did distinctiveness and origins Ethnic statehood. Croatian the of continuity historical in proofing obsessed) linguistics and culture of in terms just themselves defining safe with feltnever have thatCroats he argues narrative”. There, statehood The word that was here translated as „identity“ in the Croatian original is “samobitnost“. This word can not be can not word This “samobitnost“. is original Croatian the in „identity“ as translated here was that word The The text of the preamble was written by the first president of Republic of Croatia, Franjo Tu Press, University Manchester Identity“, National ofCroatian Formation “The (2003) J. Alex Bellamy, Main reasonfor this is most probably factthe that linguistic differences between(most notably) Croatian and That Bellamy was right and that Croats indeed “suffer(ed)” from “state obsession” is obsession” “state from “suffer(ed)” indeed Croats that and right was Bellamy That The text of preamble goes asfollows goes preamble of The text “Expressing millennial national identity 88 89 : 28 th century. 90 and national existence of the Croatian 87 and were more interested (if not even (ifnot interested andmore were ÿ man. Since some th century CEU eTD Collection 94 93 92 91 in in Croatian the on communist the international people andEurope, order changes system of Croatiaon rejection historicalthe point turning of (1963-1990), People's Republicin of Croatia (1947)andlater the of constitutions Socialistthe of Republic Fascist Council of National (1943)andCroatian Liberation then in Constitution of the the versus declaration of Croatian Independent State (1941) in the decisions of the National of War sovereignty expressedWorld foundations of the establishment during II, state the Anti- identity national Croatian the rebuilt which Banovina Croatian the of establishment The sanctioned; never Parliament Croatian 1918), that was later (onOctober 3,1929)proclaimedKingdom the Yugoslavia,of the unite inKingdom and with andMontenegroSerbia Serbs,of Slovenes Croats 1 December (on of Habsburg Monarchy; The and Serbs Croats of Slovenes, State the law,to national fact that and natural thehistorical the to decision reference with Croatia, independent of affiliation of simultaneous the National Council of -Hungary and the Austro Croatia and relations between Statedissolve state 1918to October SCS to and the Pragmatic legal both basistraditionsstates of and the on Kingdom the of the Hungary of Slavonia and Sanctionsettlement from 1868 on the fromregulation of relations between the Kingdom of Dalmatia Croatia 1712; Croatian-Hungarian The people; Croatian the of right natural and national The historical, on decision of“” Kingdom of of rule underthe Croatia Triune integrity the the of restoration of the Croatian the on in 1848 Parliament Croatian the of conclusions The 1712; in Sanction Pragmatic Parliament the on Parliament Croatian the of decision sovereign and independent an In dynasty; on 29th sovereign decision Croatianthe of inParliament 1527 to elect akingfrom Habsburgthe of Croatian national subjectivity in Croatian-Hungarian personal union; In independentan and See footnote 90 „Banovina“ is a Croatian name forthe territorial unit subject to the rule of one “Ban“ Abbreviation: State SCS [ “Ban“ is a specifically Croatian title for Imperial regent/protector/governor. cro. Država SHS ] 29 94 withinKingdom The Yugoslavia; of 92 proclaimed on the former territory 93 91 in 1939 , based , CEU eTD Collection Hrvatska ustanovljuje se kao nacionalna država hrvatskog naroda i država pripadnika autohtonih nacionalnih autohtonih pripadnika manjina(…)” Full textdržava i can be found on: naroda hrvatskog država nacionalna kao se ustanovljuje Hrvatska na odcjepljenje iudruživanje, kao osnovnih preduvjetaza mir istabilnost me i nepotrošivosti prava na samoodre na prava nepotrošivosti i povijesnih Polaze države. idemokratske suverene i nezavisne, samostalne kao Hrvatske Republike Domovinskom ratu(1991.-1995.) hrvatski je narod iskazao svoju odlu Europi, hrvatski je narod na prvim demokratskim izborima (godine 1990.), slobodno izra slobodno svoju tisu 1990.), (godine izborima demokratskim prvim na je narod hrvatski Europi, 1990.), na povijesnoj prekretnici odbacivanja komunisti odbacivanja prekretnici povijesnoj na 1990.), u Ustavu Republike Narodne Hrvatske (1947.) i poslije u ustavima Socijalisti vatske (1941.)u odlukama Zemaljskoga antifašisti temelja u uspostavi Jugoslaviji; državne suverenosti u razdobljuu Kraljevini drugoga svjetskog izraženoj rata, nasuprotsamobitnost proglašenju Nezavisne Državne Hr- državna Hrvatske hrvatska Banovine obnovljena je osnutku kojom u 1939. godine sankcionirao; nije nikada sabor Hrvatski Jugoslavijom, Kraljevinom proglašenoj Goromu Kraljevini Srba, Hrvata i Slovenaca (1. prosinca 1918. godine), poslije (3. listopada 1929. godine) na povijesno i prirodno nacionalno pravo, Državi Slovenaca, Hrvata i Srba, proglašenoj na dotadašnjem teritoriju dotadašnjem na proglašenoj Habsburške Srba, Monarhije; i u Hrvata Slovenaca, Državi pravo, s pozivom nacionalno Hrvatske, prirodno i samostalne povijesno na pristupanju oistodobnu te Austro-Ugarskom s Hrvatske odnosa državnopravnih mati i Prag- država obiju tradicija pravnih temelju na Ugarske Kraljevine i iSlavonije Hrvatske Dalmacije, Kraljevine prirodnoga prava hrvatskog naroda; u Hrvatsko-ugarskoj nagodbi 1868.godine o ure obnovi cjelovitosti Trojedne Kraljevine Hrvatske pod banskom vlaš banskom pod Hrvatske Kraljevine Trojedne cjelovitosti obnovi Hrvatskoga sabora godine 1527. o izboru kralja iz Habsburške dinastije; u samostalnoj i suverenoj odluci suverenoj i u samostalnoj Hrvatskoga sabora opragmati dinastije; Habsburške iz kralja o izboru odluci 1527. suverenoj i godine sabora u samostalnoj Hrvatskoga uniji; personalnoj uhrvatsko-ugarskoj subjektiviteta državnog hrvatskoga državi Hrvatskoj utemeljenoj u IX. stolje oblicima te održanjem i razvitkom državotvorne misli o povijesnom pravu hrvatskoga naroda na punu državnu punu na o se što naroda suverenost, hrvatskoga pravu o povijesnom misli državotvorne razvitkom i održanjem te oblicima opstojnost hrvatskoga naroda, potvr original text in Croatian goes as follows: “(…) Izražavaju 96 95 Croatianthe people andthe itsstate of national autochthonous minorities: (…)” Republicis stateof thenational being establishedas of international order, Croatia stability of forpeaceand secession basicpreconditions asthe to and association, rightunimpaired the including people, Croatian the of sovereignty national and self-determination to world andinalienability indivisibility,and un-transferability and un-exhaustibility rightthe of in modern the principles and facts accepted historical generally from presented Startingthe state. sovereign democratic and andindependent, asautonomous Republic Croatian preserve Croatian(1991-1995) people showedtheir determination andestablish willingness to and years national identity itsone will (1990)byitsthousand freely confirmed firstcreated elections the democratic From “Narodne novine“ [ novine“ “Narodne From See footnote 90 þ ke sankcije iz godine 1712.; u odluci Hrvatskoga sabora 29. listopada godine 1918. o raskidanju ü godišnju državnu samobitnost. NovimUstavom Republike Hrvatske (1990.) i pobjedom u þ injenica, te op þ itovalo: u stvaranju hrvatskih kneževina u VII. stolje VII. u kneževina hrvatskih stvaranju u itovalo: þ ü injenici da odluku Narodnoga vije eprihva 95 eng. Nationalnewspapers . With the new Croatian Constitution (1990) and victory war in the and victory new Constitution (1990) . With Croatian the þ noj sankciji izgodine 1712.; u zaklju ü ÿ ÿ enih na enje i državnu suverenost hrvatskog naroda, uklju naroda, hrvatskog suverenost državnu i enje enu slijedomukupnoga povijesnogazbivanja u razli http://narodne-novine.nn.hr/clanci/sluzbeni/232289.html ü u; uKraljevstvu Hrvata uspostavljenome u X. stolje þ ela u suvremenu svijetu i neotu þ kog vije ] the official newspaper of the Republic of Croatia: The ofCroatia: Republic of the newspaper official the ] 30 þ kog sustava i promjena me i promjena sustava kog ü i tisu ü a narodnog oslobo ü a Države SHSo ujedinjenju sa SrbijomCrnom i ü ljetnu nacionalnu samobitnost idržavnu ü þ u, na temelju povijesnoga, državnoga i državnoga povijesnoga, temelju na u, cima Hrvatskoga sabora godine 1848. o þ nost i spremnostnost i za uspostavu io ü u; u srednjovjekovnoj samostalnoj srednjovjekovnoj u u; ÿ ivosti inedjeljivosti, neprenosivosti ÿ þ unarodnog poretka, Republika ke Republike Hrvatske (1963.- ÿ enja Hrvatske (1943.), a potom ÿ ÿ unarodnog poretka u poretka unarodnog þ enju odnosa izme uju ü i od iznesenih i ÿ þ ü enom voljom potvrdio voljom enom itim državnim i i neokrnjeno pravo neokrnjeno i i ü u; uodržanju 96 . ÿ þ u uvanje CEU eTD Collection between region of (Republic of) Croatia and region of Croatian national identity sphere is one sphere identity national Croatian region of and Croatia of) (Republic of region between distinct failure some to of last in chapterthat the will beargued It difference. a significant makes state, adifferent authority, political of a different isit fact asubject that the but sphere identity national Croatian of regions the of one as considered be might It regions. Croatian The very important difference however exists. Bosnia and Herzegovina is not one of the butinCroats Dubrovnikwith “regional flavour” sodo feelCroat Bosnia andHerzegovina. identities. regional of different matter a simply are not in B&H one the and Croatia) (in identity national Croatian “main stream” the between Differences Herzegovina. and of Bosnia context the of Croatian national idea have been presented but without understanding how they in reflected Herzegovina more should be said on B&H itself. Some main characteristics and developments in Croatian experience Bosnia and Herzegovina 2.3. state the (B&H) anditsHerzegovina towards future. in Bosniaand among Croats attitudes of for different decade most development crucial in discourse nationalist whatdominated demonstrate 1990s, a Preamble was presentedhereto leave preamble surprised. that (dissolution anyone makesshouldn’t Yugoslavia) emphases of historical experiencethe Considering it. on right the (theproof to need with say lack to better or of statehood with the obsession self-rule) and context in which constitution and frustrations national reveals certain it since is muchinteresting more part The first was written Indeed, just like Croats in different Croatian regions of Slavonia, Istria, Dalmatia or Dalmatia Istria, of Slavonia, regions Croatian in likedifferent just Croats Indeed, In order better understandto mentioned in among divisions Croats Bosnia and The rest of the preamble is short and describes what Croats want Croatia to be like. 31 CEU eTD Collection constitutional status. Cultural development and national identity Zagrebu, Zagreb pp. 107-122 [eng. other”) while “interculturalism” implies “life with one another and for one another”. andfor one another one “life with implies “interculturalism” while other”) explain“multiculturalism” that implies “us”and “them” relationship (“life each next to on Hegoes to society. “multicultural” “intercultural” then rather being an Herzegovina razvoj i nacionalni identitet“, Centar za demokraciju i pravo Miko Tripalo and Pravni fakultet Sveu 99 oftendisplayed against Serbian identity. 98 97 exactly about such experience and without it Croats in B&H can not be fully understood. negative definition played a crucial role. the in B&H definition, identity positive the with Together not. were Muslims) and (Orthodox B&H in neighbours their what also but was it thought in Croatia Croats what only not meant B&H in Croat be a To life. everyday their of part was “others” the of experience that The identity in B&HbeCatholics/Croats withoutof cannot fully keepinginunderstood mind andnon –Islamic practice andcustoms.” inmeaning that peoplepractice “… defined beingaBosnian both Muslim Islamicthrough history non-Islamic sharing withreligiousother traditions Bosniansand of (…)” locality implied Muslims Bosnian for which dimension Bosnian a specific of in terms considered has Islambe with be butMuslim identity to to fully reference understood only, cannot “… Bosnian that argues she book her In Bringa. Tone anthologists Norwegian by described to particularities identityof Croat in andHerzegovina.Bosnia of the sources for division among Croats in B&H. In order to clarify it, this chapter now turns Cvitkovi Above Croatian identity in general oftenbeing defined in negative terms as what it is not. Today Bringe, Tone(1995)this is “Beingmost Muslim the Bosnian Way“,Princeton University Pres, Princeton,pp. 230 - 231 For prof.For Cvitkovi The same applies non-Islamicto population of Bosnia and Herzegovina like Catholics. in is B&H well development ofidentity characteristics important most One the of ü , Ivan (2010) “Hrvatski identitet u Bosni i Hercegovini“ in„Hrvati u BiH: ustavni položaj, kulturni ü what makes what this “Bosnian dimension” sospecialis Bosnia and Croatian Identity in Bosnia andHerzegovina 97 98 Bringe’s mentioned “Bosnian dimension” is dimension” “Bosnian mentioned Bringe’s 32 ] in Croats inB&H: þ ilišta u 99 CEU eTD Collection 103 102 100 Bosnia and Herzegovina,local for crucial identity of understanding and nation. in (pre-war) life of basis as “neighbourliness” sees fashion similar a in Sorabji Cornelia dispersed on the territory of B&H. and equally them with were ethnicother together living groups share theirspace with two Unlike in and inand specific Croatia, Bosnia different. Herzegovina Croats and Herzegovina Bosnia and Herzegovina Sveu položaj, kulturni razvoj i nacionalni identitet“, Centar za demokraciju i pravo Miko Tripalo and Pravni fakultet“Demografski pregled na stanje Katolika (Hrvata) u Bosni i Hercegovini (1996-2008) in “Hrvati u BiH: ustavni to eachother. next just then rather together truly lived and religion different of regardless neighbours their 44,24% of Serbs and 47,36% of had been relocated during war.the See Vukši 101 York New and London Tauris, I.B. violence”, institutionalized of sharpened division among them. Quite contrary, it shaped their particular national identities in identities a unique way national creating anew levelone ona higher will that be deconstructed by only particular their shaped it contrary, Quite them. among division sharpened withthough groups three identities threedifferentthe national lived this never together, first. Even at might itseem paradox although (“neighbourliness”) senseof togetherness the tensions. of notaresultreligious character economic wereof rebellions these peasants. non-Muslim with cooperated peasants Muslim cases other many landlords and against in 1835 wasspecific for cooperation Orthodox between while Catholics belandlords Uprising Muslim.of againstbut whohappenrather to against Muslimsassuch based on divisions.religious Uprisings Bosnian of Christian never aimedpopulation were Malcolm, Noel (2002) “Bosnia: A short history“, Pan Macmillan, London: p. 122 Elayet (latervilayet) was aterritorial and administrative unit of the Ottaman Empire. After the last war this is no longer the truth though. According to 1991 B&H census 61,24% of Croats, Sorabji,Cornelia (1994) “A very modern War þ ilišta u Zagrebu, Zagreb pp. 45 - 62 [eng. Compared toCroats in Croatia, this element does make experience of Croats in Bosnia For example,For (in form conflicts of uprisings) 19 within Therefore, the everyday experience of “others” in an “intercultural” society nourished society in an“intercultural” “others” of experience everyday the Therefore, in Croats in B&H: constitutional status. Cultural development andnational identity 101 History of B&H shows that common people relayed on Demografic overview of thesituation of Catholic (Croats)in ”, in Watson, H., Hinde, R., “War: a cruel necessity: the bases the necessity: a cruel “War: R., Hinde, H., Watson, ”, in 33 th Bosnian elayet Bosnian ü , Tomo (2010) 103 100 Reasons for 102 were not ] CEU eTD Collection it is increasingly true that place of origin and ethnicity coincide. ethnicity and oforigin place that true increasingly is it 106 Denis “Language, Nation, and State. Identity Politics in aMultilingual Age”, Palgrave, New York, pp. 215 - 230 105 58 – 76 [ 104 is of course artificial, result of an attempt to create a norm that will be thought in schoolslanguageswho speaks ofthe two only Standardlanguage canunderstandandspeakone both. and standard language fordiffer (norm)enough recognize anyone do themalthough to one the isone isnoguarantee Catholic/Croat. Herzegovina from distinct Evenhave ifinhabitants of Herzegovinaothers. accent,beingfrom distinctive in speakishardlanguage to Bosnia and Herzegovina Croats since “objective characteristics” isidentity that notnecessarily previous the contradicting onebutitdid make a difference. this particular existed there theCroatian perhaps under) Above violence. (or useof extensive B&H is he or she coming from and not of what nationality they are. meansfrom approximately where recognizein someone’s only know to noticeable.accent To language/norm text is written. concludesread severalhave would thatone lines in to textbeforethe of establishing which approximately 10 percentwith5 to most of differentwordsbeingthe He relatively infrequent. are norms mentioned between differences that languages. Heestimates separate completely three not and language same the of norms different three as seen be only can Serbian region rural dialects “make differentthree languages: Bosnian, Croatian andSerbian. Gardeunderlines thatin Yugoslav up a very homogeneous Language is leastsolidprobably elementof threethe entity”. sinceit’s quite difficult to talk about For consciousness. himnational and religion Bosnian,language, follows: as them lists and Herzegovina Croatian and Today this is more and more often not the case. After extensive in the first half of the 1990's ofthe half first the in cleansing ethnic extensive After case. the not often more and ismore this Today Garde, Paul (2004) “Unity and Plurality in the Serbo-CroatianLinguistic Sphere” in Judit, Tony, Lacorne, Cvitkovi However, what can be claimed is that Croatian standard language (norm)Serbian and language standard is Croatian whatcanbeclaimed However, that agree withis Cvitkovi itdifficultto Therefore, Cvitkovi eng. Croatian Identity in Bosnia and Herzegovina ü , Ivan (2006) “Hrvatski identitet u Bosni iHercegovini“, Synopsis d.o.o., Zagreb and Sarajevo, pp. ü recognizes three “objective characteristics” of Croats in and Bosnia of Croats “objective characteristics” three recognizes 105 Differences within Bosnia and Herzegovina are even less areeven Bosnia andHerzegovina Differences within 34 ] ü that language constitutes language of one constitutes the that 106 104 CEU eTD Collection 67 [ 109 articles. ofhis topics these to referring when „our“ word uses Heregularly soon. and places books, writers, persona, events, historical Croatian major about writes Gavran Ignacije which in articles these different factorsdifferent linking numerouspeople whouseit asan imaginary link between many implies consciousness National element. only being one then rather here, mentioned Herzegovina who self-identity as Croats”. self-identity who Herzegovina and in Bosnia those of majority for relevant most the be “empirically to proved religion [ in B&H. This part of the chapter will end with Cvitkovi identities B&H on definitionsdepended religious in often of other country.the chapter also continued lineandinsisteddefinitionthat downthis identity of Catholic/Croat in This territories. surrounding from B&H into way their making ideas national with Croats into Catholics of the transformation well as as population andthe Catholic Order Franciscan Herzegovina. strong In chapter emphasesprevious made had been thelink between on the notion. same share the don’t who form others apart of B&H Catholics/Croats issets (literature) 108 in 15 in Maruli like Marko literature and writers “Croatian” about writes often culture Croatian on his articles of series 107 Cvitkovi “objectivecharacteristics” the term “language”is in itlanguage such used way than bearguedthat one of could constitutes andliterature language are used history that to proof historic continuity one language.of If the language also withof “official” used in the comes sphere. Together standardization public eng. PathsandPinters: Series ofarticles onourhistory] Cvitkovi Gavran, Ignacije (1988)“Putoviputokazi: i Niz Marko Maruli eng. Croatian Identity in Bosnia and Herzegovina th century. Cvitkovi characteristic last The Therefore, it is clear that religion played (and still plays) crucial role in Croat identity in Croat role crucial plays) still (and played religion that is clear it Therefore, and Bosnia in identity and religion of question the on much said been already has It ü , Ivan (2006) “Hrvatski identitet u Bosni i Hercegovini“, Synopsis d.o.o., Zagreb and Sarajevo, pp. ü is considered to be the father of . He was born in present day Split (Croatia) ü 107 and “Judita”. his piece ü talks about. Bosnian Franciscan Ignacije Gavran in Franciscan Ignacije Gavran Bosnian talks about. ü 109 mentions is more of a synthesis of everything of synthesis a of more is mentions þ lanaka o našoj prošlosti“, Svijetlo rije ] 108 35 In that way, notion of what Croatian what of notion way, that In Publisher“Svijetlo rije ü ’s acknowledgment that common þ i“ fourpublished i“ books of þ i, Sarajevo,i, 9 – 14 pp. CEU eTD Collection Croats in B&H are finding it easier to identify with Croatia then country they live in. some why explain to distinction such uses and Croats of identity national from separate 111 Hungarian Empire until 1990s and brake up of Yugoslavia, Croats livedone in country. 110 and later on offer a possible explanation for why and how this division was possible. inattitudes differences confirmed that research field of results will provide chapters following characteristics of Croatian national identity in general and in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The among some Croats in the later one. The third chapter will deal with this intomore detail. became self-identification basis for “state” it thenew would seem that andB&H, Croatia between borders of ofit.establishment state thebreak and After future Yugoslavia upof is and of what the Bosnia onhowshouldbeadministrated andHerzegovina disagree state the being Croats in particular context of B&H, they differ in a way they identity themselves and are havingissues and their demonstrate differentAlthough attitudes. all being and Croats sharedone. only since allCroats 1990s before issue an been hasn’t versa) vice rather (or belongs nation a which to state The state. is the this thesis) of topic the to inrespect especially (and especially today important corpus. national Croatian one entered they thus and in them believe Herzegovina and Bosnia these elements might themselves. Language, religion, historical culture, experiencebe andso on (as much as all of constructed) constitute a basis for any common identity. Croats in Ibid. pp. 105- 115 It beenhas previously noted sincethat 1878 and occupation of Bosnia and Herzegovina by Austro – The only element that was not mentionedwas paragraph in The tobe notthat proves previous only elementand that These first two chapters focused anddescribing background firstThese chapters two on historical explaining Herzegovina and inBosnia Croats that state the of element final this with is exactly It 110 Cvitkovi 36 ü talks about “state identity”“state it’s about though talks as 111 CEU eTD Collection 115 114 113 112 of B&H structure reform for administrative of the needthe to“homelandissue”are related attitudes livingof Croats in B&H.Attitudes wereof that interest forspecific this research the Interviews of Subjects and Place 3.1. Time, confirm them ordischargeand exploretheir nature them. either both need to the and Herzegovina in and Croats Bosnia the among differences the on from debate ongoing asitin introduction, has came, the mentioned research beenalready Bosnia and Herzegovinafrom April April14 to 25,2010. The incentive for conducting the in conducted results research of the willpresent chapter more detail,into this differences these explain to moving before However, in Herzegovina. and Bosnia in population of experience III-TheInterviewsand CHAPTER ResearchResults interviews were conducted in Zagreb where four students from from fourwere Herzegovina instudents whereBosnia and Zagreb interviews wereconducted officialthe Church Order) wasintended provide to abetter understanding of research topic(s). the political elite, the university professors, members of the Franciscan Order and members of members of with interviews (specifically of amount certain it. that, Besides of sources for the seek finallyto lie and wherethemain from detect differences Bosnia, andCroats Herzegovina representative of all Croats in B&H. Main intention was to compare answers of Croats from Is a reform needed? If yes onwhat basis should it be implemented? Are the Croats endangered Herzegovina? in B&H? and Bosnia Why in and how, living if yes? Croats ofthe homeland the is What Attitudes that most likely mirror differences among Croats in respect to the main hypothesis of this thesis. The aim of the research was to collect qualitative (not quantitative) data on differing The first chapter of this study already emphasized to some extent different historical As it mentioned,has been already researchstarted on April 14, 2010.The first Considering the time and fund limits the research never intended to have a sample have to intended never research the limits fund and time the Considering 113 , the status of , the status of Croat entity in Bosnia andHerzegovina 37 115 and the future of B&H. 114 , the , 112 CEU eTD Collection book “Hrvatski identitet u Bosni iHercegovini“ [ 126 Development of Bosnia and Herzegovina in ThePost-Dayton Period“. Political of„The author the also Heis Herzegovina. and Bosnia of Presidency of the wasamember he period 125 Bosnia and Herzegovina. Franciscan motherly magazine Light of the Word” "Katoli recently acquired his PhD on Faculty of Theology, University Bosnia). of Vienna. and The topicHerzegovina of his PhDbetween thesis border onthe was (region 124 of population on of works of series author of “Svijetlo rije 123 [ Herzegovina” is also the authorof He the “HrvatiSarajevo. in i Theology katolici Franciscan u Bosni ofthe iHercegovini” magazine official [ Franciscana“, of „Bosna editor chief also was and respected publicist, president of the Croatian National Council of B&H [ 122 HDZ 1990. Me 121 and member of HDZ 1990 (political party). 120 “Crkva nakamenu” [ for education on the same faculty. He is also a chief editor of the pastoral-sheet of the dioceses of Herzegovina119 Bosnia and Herzegovina 1990 – 2025: debates on past, present and future of Bosnia and Herzegovina Boji “Bosna i Hercegovina 1990.-2025. : rasprave o prošlosti, sadašnjosti i budu i sadašnjosti oprošlosti, : rasprave 1990.-2025. i Hercegovina “Bosna interviews addition withto FranciscansFr.LukaMarkeši April 25 atotal of interviewed19 people were in Sarajevo andFojnice April (on in 23) daljnjeg razvitka” [ [ Faletar Luka Minister government, regional Hercegovina“ [ Hercegovina“ Sociology and Political system courses. He is also author of the books (among others): “Enigma Bosna i 118 117 useful. most was mandate his andafter during before, politics Herzegovina, Croatian and on Bosnia input towards His – 2003. 2000 period the in Government Croatian in Affairs of Foreign Minister 116 questioned together with professors Božo Žepi incontinuedand inMostar Me and Bosnia Herzegovina Picula. Tonino Mr. with together interviewed already mentioned interview mentioned already eng. „Croatseng. in B&H: constitutional status. Cultural development and national identity“ eng. “Croatianeng. entity in Bosnia andHerzegovina: forand against“ Ivan Cvitkovi Ivan Mirko Pejanovi Fr. Drago Boji Fr. Mato Topi Mato Fr. Fr. Luka Markeši Luka Fr. Pero Pero Luka Faletar isacurrent Ministerof Health inthe Cantonal Government of Herzegovina – Neretva Canton Božo Goluža is a professor of History on Faculty of Philosophy, University of Mostar and also a vice-dean a also and Mostar of University Philosophy, of Faculty on of History aprofessor is Goluža Božo Božo Žepi Introduction. Seethe Mr. Tonino Picula is currently a member of [ ÿ ü ugorje are situated in Herzegovina region, while Sarajevo and Fojnice are situated in andFojnice aresituated in whileSarajevo the situated region, Herzegovina ugorje are 124 þ ki tisak u Bosni i Hercegovini. Franjeva iHercegovini. uBosni tisak ki û and MirkoPejanovi Professors iro Pavlovi iro Four cities in Bosnia and Herzegovina had been chosen for interviews. Mostar and Mostar interviews. for chosen been had Herzegovina and in Bosnia cities Four ü ] and one of the editors of “Hrvati u BiH : ustavnoi položaj, kulturni razvoj i nacionalni identitet” nacionalni i razvoj kulturni položaj, ustavnoi : u BiH of “Hrvati editors ofthe one ] and is a retired professor on Faculty of Law, University of Mostar. He lectured, among others, Legal eng. “Enigmaeng. Bosnia and Herzegovina“ þ i” [ ü ü ü is a professor at the Faculty of Political Science, University of Sarajevo and an author of the author an and Sarajevo of University Science, Political of Faculty the at professor a is is a member of the Franciscan Order (Franciscan Province “Silver Bosnia”) and chief editor chief and Bosnia”) “Silver Province (Franciscan Order Franciscan ofthe amember is ü is a young member of the Franciscan Order (Franciscan Province “Silver Bosnia”). He eng. “Deterioration of Dayton: problems and difficulties of further development” is a current dean of the Faculty of Political Science, University of Sarajevo. In the war time eng. Light of the Word ü ü eng. Church on the rock is a prominent member of the Franciscan Order (Franciscan Province “Silver Bosnia”), “Silver Province (Franciscan Order Franciscan ofthe member prominent a is is a spokesman for the Government of Herzegovina – Neretva Canton and member of member and Canton –Neretva Herzegovina of Government the for spokesman a is 117 with Mr. Marinko Mari ] a publishing house of the Franciscan Province “Silver Bosnia”. Heis Bosnia”. “Silver Province Franciscan the of house ] apublishing ]. ü þ 125 eng. Croatian Identity in Bosniaand Herzegovina ki mjese ki and Ivan Cvitkovi 120 38 ]; “Hrvatski entitet u Bosni i Hercegovini: za i protiv“ andPero ü þ ni magazin Svjetlo rije Svjetlo magazin ni 118 116 and Božo Goluža After followed Zagreb Dubrovnikand eng.”Croats and Catholics in Bosnia and ü . On April . On April 19 and 20 interviews ];”Istrošenost Daytona : problemi i teško problemi : Daytona ];”Istrošenost cro. Hrvatski Sabor û ÿ ü iroPavlovi ugorje where 14 Croats had 14Croats ugorje been where cro. Hrvatskocro. nacionalno vije , 122 ü 126 ü Fr.MatoTopi nosti Bosne i Hercegovine” [ Hercegovine” i Bosne nosti ] . þ i" [ i" 119 ü eng. “Catholic press in . 121 and members of the ] and was also a ] From April 21 till 21 April From ü , 123 ] Fr. Drago ] and ] ü e BiH eng. ü ] e CEU eTD Collection 130 Fojnice is a city west to Sarajevo with asmall Croatian community and one of the oldest Franciscan monasteries. 129 mayorCatholic pilgrimages and has a special meaning forCroats in B&H. Neretva Canton with Croatian the population majority.Me 128 and national identity of Catholic (Croats)in Bosnia and Herzegovina place of interview, sex interview,and sex age: place of B&H. in Croats of majority makes cumulatively which Tripalo Tripalo and Pravni fakultet Sveu „Hrvatiin u BiH: ustavni položaj,kulturni razvoj inacionalni identitet“,Centar za demokraciju i pravo Miko 127 Me and from Mostar and Bosnia Croats for interviewing and wereselected Fojnice Sarajevo around 13%of 000 or total the population. 500 in at B&H Croats of finalestimate the up rounding declare Catholics, not as do estimate they that more Croats thisadd 50000 number they To and Herzegovina. Catholics inBosnia region of Central Bosnia. provided on data Based by Catholicthe Churchthereare454921 Mostar diocese Mostar Ibid. pp. 50- 54 Sarajevo and Fojnice are under the jurisdiction of Sarajevo diocese. Sarajevo is also the capital of B&H and Mostar and Me Vukši ÿ ugorje for Croats from ugorje Croats for Herzegovina. The structure in interviewedand the of The structure according subjects Herzegovina to Bosnia ü , Tomo (2010) “Demografski pregled stanjena Katolika (Hrvata) u Bosni iHercegovini (1996-2008) Total Me and Mostar Fojnice Sarajevo and ÿ 128 ÿ ugorje are under jurisdiction of Mostardiocese. Mostar is also a capital of Herzegovina – ugorje ] had whileSarajevo 192403Catholics diocese Table I: The structure of interviewed subjects according þ ilišta uZagrebu,ilišta Zagreb pp. 45- 62 [eng. to theplaceof the interview,sex and age 14 33 19 interviewed Numberof people in Croats in B&H: constitutional status.Cultural development 127 39 According same tothe from estimates 2008, ÿ ugorje issituated south toMostar and is one of the 7 Sex 14 7 M 130 6 19 12 F This was the main reason why Demografic overview of the situation Age 5 13 8 -35 129 had 204060Catholics 9 20 11 35+ CEU eTD Collection research. group of experts onThe the other analyses. in handdeducted later was were directlyattitudes which asked from to give experience life experttheir about opinions asked was group on series“common” of topics relevant for the in any way people in the group. The group of “common” subjects is opposed to group of “expert” subjects. The 131 interviews had been recorded and later on analyzed for the attitude comparison. for theattitude analyzed andlater on recorded hadbeen interviews opinions were individual collected, interview wouldbe an brought to end. All the of targeted as the As soon interviewee. each with topics interview coverthe all of need to different stories, depending on personal experience of each subject. Therefore, there was no make providebeopinionsintention andthese certain couldwas to subjects acquired through The from list. the topics discuss different to wereencouraged andtherefore experiences of them were covered during a single interview. Different and "story" framingeasier tointerpret the separately. the subjects had different own experience. By into conversation the lifeembedding theirtopics experience itwas much stories and of their part as research for the relevant topics/events about talk to wereencouraged subjects after which life story experience with a short interviews started Instead, “publicthe opinion”. by framed often opinion thatare answers well structured encourage interviews that media-like interview “common” the for prepared story” semi-structured types Interview 3.2. The interview with all four students. as a group wasconducted The interview is male. female and one four are of three them, Of from are Sarajevo. two Bosniaand from Northern one isHerzegovina, from One student Herzegovina inZagreb,making total of the number 37. interviewed people the (“common”) The word “common” is used to differentiate between two groups of interviewed subjects and not to describe to not and subjects interviewed of groups two between differentiate to used is “common” word The In addition, four more interviews were conducted withmoreinterviewsfourIn conducted from addition, students Bosnia and were The topics for interviews were used only as guideline for the interviewerinterviews The for guidelinefor used andrarely as topics all the were only “life the typefirst was The interviews. types of of two the itself consisted The research 40 131 people. The idea was to avoid Theideawasto people. CEU eTD Collection 4. In 4. In general additional questions 3. Dayton Bosnia3. Dayton experience War time2. experience Brake-up experience 1. of Yugoslavia The topics the“common” for interview asfollows: werestructured people x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Željko Komši Status of Republic of parties in Other Bosnia andHerzegovina inSplit HDZ of andBosnia Herzegovina Croatian elections and results in 2000 of Alija Izetbegovi Death Death of the first Croatian president Franjo Tu Franciscans) (especially Church the of Role institutions Cantonal State institutions Bosnia andHerzegovina itself The fall of North DestructionBosnian of Mostar’s “Old Bridge” by Croatian forces region Formation of Croatian quasi-militia (HOS) and their crimes amongConflicts and Croats ) Muslims(Mostar, inquasi-state Bosnia andHerzegovina Formation of Croatian Communities that would eventually form Croatian First conflicts in Eastern Bosnia (city Zvornik)of Formation of indominated quasi-states Serb Bosnia Referendum independenceon of Bosnia and Herzegovina Izetbegovi Kara Infamous First news of conflicts in Croatia Krajna quasi-state) of (Serb Formation SAO in Croatia independence Tu on Referendum Franjo and HDZ by lead movement national Croatian inEvents andSerbia in Kosovo latethe 1980s Dayton peace treaty Dayton Ideas of separation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Tu Croatian population ü and his ü asthe first non-HDZ Croat member of The Presidency ÿLü speech in Bosnian Parliament inBosnian speech Bosniak Srpska ü 41 party (SDA) Bosanska Posavina Bosanska ÿ man ÿ man-Miloševi with the majority of ÿ man ü plan) CEU eTD Collection hand. understanding topic(s) at the of for my better interviews of these and importance the relevance however, only few allowed for their statements tobe used in this thesis which does not reduce 132 professions. their and names their by here sociological and cultural context of it. In case of expertinterviews all of the subjects are listed understanding of the situation of Croats in B&H, conflictsfor abetter wasused provided information level.The a more general move to could among them and broader political, interviews expert the theinterview, firsttypeof tothe as opposed Therefore, thesis. andthe research the of opinions onthetopic expertacquire but experiences to personal not aim was See footnotes 116 - 125 1. The expert interviews were structured as follows: interviews werestructured The expert The second type of the interview was much more structured: the expert interview. The expert the more structured: wasmuch interview of The secondtype the Franciscan Order x x x x x x x x What isWhat your opinion on Union European and Croatia’s accession? Why? elections? national Croatian on vote you Do How do you see the role of the Republic of Croatia? What do you see as main threat(s) to Croatian population in B&H? Who represents Croatian interests in Bosnia in the best way? Why? police officer? Sarajevo, supporter footballof “Sarajevo”, was club killed byCroatian What do you think isWhat your opinion ofon dual-citizenship? “Široki BrijegisWhat your opinion on future the of Bosnia and Herzegovina? incident” when a young Croat from x x x identity division identity with connection possible and Order Franciscan among Division “Bariši Importance of history for identity formation of Croats in B&H ü affair” from affair”from mid 19century 132 42 All of the interviews had been had Allof been recorded, interviews the CEU eTD Collection 3. In 3. In general additional questions 2. Competing Nationalisms x x x x x x x possible effects this might have on the Croats in B&H? and accession Croatia’s and Union European on opinion your is What years ago? 10 comparedto today Croatia of Republic of the role the you do see How B&H? What do you see as main threat(s) to interests of the Croatianway? best inthe population then represents in Who Herzegovina? and in Bosnia interests Croatian the are What police officer? Sarajevo, supporter of football club “Sarajevo” was killed by Croatian What do you think isWhat your opinion ofon future the of Bosnia and Herzegovina? “Široki Brijeg incident”in B&H? politics identity when a young doespoliticalHow by introduced system,Dayton effect agreements, Croat from x x x x x x x x x x x x x x Electoral victory of Željko Komši Željko of victory Electoral and Herzegovina) Bosnia toward changes in (policy Croatia of Impact2000 changes Croatian policies of dual citizenship and votingtrans-border lobby”)“Herzegovina and the Šušak in Bosnia War (Gojko in Croatia The role of the Order today Order Order under Communistthe rule The role of the Order in the WW II Church hierarchy and Franciscans) official of split (political inBosnia democracy of years first The Impact of Impact of Tu conflict(s) the preceded that of events coverage Media impact their and platform political SDA and HDZ Importance of Republican inborders Yugoslavia regime) Ustaša (B&Hunder The WWIIexperience identity the for idea formationnational of Croats in B&H Croatian of importance Historical ÿ man’s andIzetbegovi 43 ü ü ’s speeches CEU eTD Collection three terms. three 134 constitutional status. Cultural development and national identity Zagrebu, Zagreb pp. 107-122 [eng. completely a different thing.” different a completely beinisis Sarajevo aCroat(…Bosnia…) onething,(…Herzegovina…) to or and razvoj i nacionalni identitet“, Centar za demokraciju i pravo Miko Tripalo and Pravni fakultet Sveu 133 “the Catholic Croats” or as “the Bosnian Croats”. Out of 19 interviewees only two (both of ways three the inone male tothemselves referring Fojnice wereusually and inSarajevo subjects from line Unlikethose Herzegovina, the division. regional of the follow flawlessly and howeverexist The differences as its maincharacteristic. Catholicism relevant to this thesis, which the interviewed subjects did notshare. containsattitudes, those group other whilethe subjects, interviewed majority by the of the thesis) had been Thefirst containscrystallized. group attitudes are shared that tosome extent toward previously mentioned topics. confirming claim such and exploringhow these differencesin reflect attitudes people’s historical experience which allows Cvitkovi in haddifferent Herzegovina in Croats and Croats Bosnia showedthat chapters previous two such claim. The results of the first part of the research followsfuture) that regional theresearch eitherthatdivisions aimed at discharging confirming or has already been presented in the state of B&H among Croats in Bosnia and Herzegovina, asbeen established. Following the hypothesis therethat is a (towards in division attitudes wellthe as towards its reform and its differences and –similarities research of the 3.3. Results It is not implied here that subjects used exclusively one of these terms. Indeed in most cases, subjects used all used subjects cases, most in Indeed terms. these of one exclusively used subjects that here implied is not It Cvitkovi All of the subjects without exception expressed their Croatian identity and marked and identity Croatian their expressed exception without subjects the of All of thepurpose (for this twomainof Afterattitudes analyzing collected groups data, the After 37interviews, although without representative sample,certain couldtrends have ü , Ivan (2010) “Hrvatski identitet u Bosni i Hercegovini“ in“Hrvati u BiH: ustavni položaj, kulturni Croatian Identity in Bosnia andHerzegovina 133 The second part of the research (the interviews) aimed at aimed interviews) (the of theresearch part Thesecond 44 ü to claim how“(…) to tobe inCroat ] in 134 Croats inB&H: : as “the Catholics”, as : as“the Catholics”, þ ilišta u CEU eTD Collection they describedin way. they a positive were not were, if they and, mentioned ever hardly were Muslims business, everyday discussing When in city. maintain peace the to bein order made hadto and a deal with whom Mostar) river (in the of side other the on live who those as mentioned only were non-Catholics Herzegovina building, sharingin space, sitting office together drinkingschool, and In so on. together same in the living context: in some neighbours non-Muslim their mentioned interviewees of neighbourliness mentionedwas regularly when everydaylife.discussing All of the andtheir respect wish nottomingle andmixin any way.andFojniceSarajevo some In form such stories while people most other either spokeof Muslims in negative terms orexpressed holidays andviceversa. about talking When pre-warFojnice. and in Sarajevo interviewed Croats among mentioned often was war period they good relations with their neighbours. Muslim often emphasized from regularly Bosnia Croats tell religion. of other theneighbours toward attitudes stories of visiting and “the Herzegovinian”. “the Croat” their Muslimone used “thefriends Bosnian Croat” and used itwhen Croats intalking about B&H in “thebutnotwhengeneral forhimself,talking about no Catholic” Muslim and 14 of 14 used identify one to themselves, used Croats” “theCatholic 2 subjects only inthis, Herzegovina: at the same time terms 138 Croats of Sarajevo and Fojnice are predominantly mixed with Muslims while the Serb population is small. 137 136 135 “Catholic” word The Croats”. “the only as tothemselves years old)18 and23 referred between Similar stories were told in 15 of 19 interviews in Sarajevo and Fojnice. the that fact the in itself reveals explanation logical The on 4occasions. mentioned were neighbors Orthodox “Hercegovac“ Cro. Cro. “Katolik” One additional difference, indirectly related to the one just mentioned, the just concerns tothe one indirectly related difference, One additional 135 was the most used word when they talked about Croatian to identity. about Contrary when they talked wasmost usedword the 138 In Herzegovina, on the contrary, only 3 subjects in Mostar told 136 45 137 The peaceful life and coexistence before the before life Thepeaceful andcoexistence CEU eTD Collection were Croats andBosniaks Serbs. not or were Croats becausebackground. they subjects ethnic justlived worse the then they thought No others and religion bothertheir of people regardless imagined to problemscan easilybe those that fit on so and benefits social small the pensions, low the salaries, low The Herzegovina. and interviews, Croats are facing the same everyday problems as all the other citizens of Bosnia mentionedsubjects problems thatwould be intrinsic toCroats. chance. views. He openly expressed his support for the Ustaše movement and stated Herzegovina(Herzegovina) whois withinrarely B&Hdiscussed only his personal by life and most of the time talked about political issues and his 140 B&H. leaving people young on discussions 139 economic situation in the county ineconomic is situation toblame. county the that negative most agreed people and interviews mentionedthe inall Croatia,of often was Herzegovina ifno measures were taken. Massive emigration of the Croats from B&H to, most definition problemthe of and the ways of possible solutions. the regarding exist opinions in differences the However, government. Canton the of members two the with interviews in the confirmed also was This problems. the to solution the seek Bosniaframework within as andHerzegovina which to interviewed Herzegovinians accept theinterviewsmore that inHerzegovina, mewrong separatism andrevealed encounter proved inefficientpublic administration, low incomes and Although soon. initiallyI expected to corruption, state huge bureaucracy, widespread state about shared concerns subjects 32 of 33 B&H is their homeland and that Croats should seek for their rights within in. In different ways and from two from HerzegovinaMostar (one Me from Withof exception noticed. 3 subjects were of state the Bosniatowards andHerzegovina Thesubject was interviewed inMe “The mad economic situation” is only litotes. The general despair and lack of any optimism dominated Contrary partof Contrary significantto one differences maininthe hypotheses, no attitudes Both groups expressedBoth groups fears their thatCroats wouldin disappear and Bosnia ÿ ugorje, aged 53, mail, born inLjubuški, Bosnia and Herzegovina 139 46 Accept subject one in Me ÿ ugorje), all other interviewees all agreed ugorje), that other 140 According to these to According ÿ ugorje, none ugorje, of the CEU eTD Collection would the third entity would in the benefitCroats entity third “We need administerB&H. to on ourselves our how argument in convincible offered Herzegovina subjects the of None completely.abolished Srpska should disappear, while most of subjectsother agreeditshouldbe reduced butnot Republic of that 5expressed opinion their of Only and Herzegovina. Bosnia within state the interests and that the best way to do this is to insist on their establishmentprotect to have of they a separate that entity endangered; are Croats is that argument main Their secession. entity the in of favour for Croat oneof was establishmentand the interviewees: the 13opted and The Federation). The and 143 142 141 region of Herzegovina. in but the for only Croats the thirdin favour entity creating and of 3were state centralized that would be immune to ethnic structure of the population, one was in favour of the implemented.state Among 19interviewed: 15 for some opted kindof regionalization of B&H Sarajevo. the others. Mostgroup. of problems talkedCroat’s interviewed the shared byall assomething about the “It’s the political theseparate Bosnia andHerzegovinamoreissues citizens rarely as and of often as same for all of us!”framed byinterviewer’s question. said one was as theconversation soon answersas clear andgive quite expected wereableto subjects 48-year old issues casuallyremained theirpersonal when of such experiences, ignorantdiscussing unemployednations”. beds and“Two three saying: famous the resembled cases these woman mentionedsubjects “the life Theof mostdifficult popular Croats”. the ideasexpressedin in “Entity politics“ refers here to the divisionof Bosnia and Herzegovina on the two entities ( cro.“Svima nam je isto!“ cro.” Dva kreveta i tri nacije” As opposed to this, different ideas were offered in Mostar and Me in Mostar ideas wereoffered tothis, different As opposed political about talked subjects Fojnice and in Sarajevo interviews the In thecaseof It was only after they were directly asked what their problems are as Croats, that 142 All of them agreed that “entity politics” “entity that agreed them of All 47 143 should be abolished and reform of the ÿ ugorje. Out of of 14 ugorje. Out 141 While they While CEU eTD Collection Bosnia disagree?” in in and theCroats “Why dotheCroats Herzegovina themain possible question: answerto a will offer chapter Thefollowing bebehind disagreements. would question reasonsare these relevant more the However, Ireland. Northern in the Protestants the and Catholics the with difficult not forknowledge identify. are same issues can situation apply the these The and to onmany have Palestinians the issuesthat is Israelis disagreements and the a general reform andshould beexecuted where would B&Hgoin future. the solving their how problems, these they on disagree problems should besolved,kind what of for B&H aframework as in accept generally Croats B&H although that confirm therefore disagree on the important issues of the state, its reform and its future. A short summary would inhere inand totestthehypothesisCroats provided andorder that Bosnia Herzegovina had selected been be thisthesis importance for of were considered to that Only 25. results the 144 always have Croatia; we are here today and will most probably be tomorrow as well.” inwill in“Those Herzegovina in Herzegovina: Bosnia Croats and between Croats difference the mirrors Sarajevo in man old 64-year a by a sentence survive, not would B&H case interviewed if subjects wasthatsomesurvive.necessary kind a reform is In B&Histo of the personal life experiences andeveryday problems. this (the thirdsolve would entity) anyof problems expressedwhen those talking about how explain to managed one no However, entity. Croat the of favour in arguments proclaimed “If Bosniaks and Serbs haveown!”; “Our voices would beheard!”, “We have would atelevision in ourlanguage!”,own an entity, so should we!” - these were some of the most often cro. “Oni u Hercegovini Only provideestablishing the differencesdoesnot many answerto Thefactquestions. presented collected This chapter only from a small of April April data portion 14 till In respect to the future of Bosnia and Herzegovina, general conclusion of all ü e uvijek imati Hrvatsku; mi smo tu, a vrlo vjerojatno i sutra” 48 144 CEU eTD Collection Herzegovinians?) Security and The Future 3-4 (6), pp.37 – 86 [ (6) 2005, pp 129 – 149 [ them is offered. By just establishing them we leave alot importantof questions unanswered. for noexplanation little use if they are of thesedifferences, anddetect describe to is important why is such there regionala strong identity present amongin Croats itHerzegovina. Although wrote on topicthe and all of whom dedicated theirarticles toproving and confirminghow and 147 146 127 [ 145 An Mladen identity. regional have strong Herzegovinians that from furtherestablishing go don’t academic articles inmost inis between Herzegovina andCroats there Bosnia, someCroats barrier kind of that andHerzegovina illusions inBosnia no are far.Although there so presented differences materialize. andhow on differences wherethese empirical some data national identity how it providedshaped and Finally,the developed inB&H. chapter third experiences. The second one provided the context of the division by explaining how Croatian demonstrating in howCroats inHerzegovina and Croats Bosnia hadhistorical different division of Croat population of B&H.chapter provided Thefirst historical background from data inand ofinterviews conducted series Herzegovina. Bosnia acquired of asaresult came Third onthetopic. chapter experts interviewsthe with through acquired mostly in thelibraries, then with help the and the guidance of my mentors and finally of firstsecondchapter hadbeen and the thesis this Thedatafor the Bosnia and Herzegovina. CHAPTER IV- Explaining the Differences Lu Dodig, Radoslav (2005) ”Hercegovina ili esej o „zemlji na An eng. What is Bosnia without Herzegovina? þLü þLü , Ivo, (2005) “Ima liHercegovine? (Tko i zašto negira Hercegovinu Hercegovce?)”i National in The forth chapter, the present one, will offer the possible explanation for the explanation possible the offer will one, present the chapter, The forth The aim of these chapters was to, each in its own segment, help understand the , Mladen (2005) “Što je Bosna bez Hercegovine?” in National Security and The Future 3-4 (6), pp. 87 – The previous three chapters presented results of the research on Croats of Croats on the research of results presented chapters three The previous ] eng. Herzegovina or essay on “the land onthe edge þLü 145 , Radoslav Dodig eng. Is thereHerzegovina? ] 146 49 , Ivo Lu ü enaru“ enaru“ in National Security and FutureThe 3-4 þLü 147 are just some of the authors who ( Who and why denies Herzegovina and ] CEU eTD Collection rather were influenced by broader socio-economic differences of two regions that nourishedregions that of differences two socio-economic influencedby broader were rather but conflict Franciscan internal justsome of result werenotthe Thesedifferences Bosnia. in from those traditions had different monasteries Herzegovinian indicate and differently conflict a than more nothing was this conclude might one glance first at Although Herzegovinian. the on and Bosnian the existed: lines two which within the Order Franciscan the in differences serious administrative issue(s), the Franciscan records from the period prove identity. development differentof two mentalities andnourished regional a strong Herzegovinian said there; this section will conclude how different historical experiences laid foundation for whathas been inBosnia. Leaningonto already and Herzegovina been differently experienced in Bosnia and Herzegovina and paid special Identities Regional and Experiences Historical 4.1. The attention to those events and periods that had others”; future.the of and 4.unstablesociety/insecurestructure/”experience experience/regional identities; factor/failed2. political politics; 3. population possible. is it how and division the behind reasons the understand help together that factors four different identities) andHerzegovina only historical dimension using differing experience(the one that nourished thus falling into a trap of oversimplification, this chapter will offer As mentioned in the first chapter, in mid 19 in mid chapter, first in the mentioned As Croats focused on firstchapter inthe centuries two last of the overview The historical historical four topics: following 1. the be will around The chapter organized therefore Contrary to those attempts to explain the division among Croats in Bosnia and 50 th century century the “Bariši ü afi” revealed affair” CEU eTD Collection ³ý the of presence identity; regional Herzegovinian specific Dalmatia; of region Croatian the with links strong confirmed occasions numerous on border; Croatian the of proximity the in account “Herzegovinian”. Taking or “Croat” word the they use either Bosnia.from Instead use form “Bosnia”any word the of Croats self identifying when as to themselves opposed differences. noted for explanation full the provide alone not can identity, regional of creation the of factor asa experience, historic that the itshould beemphasized However, Bosnia. and Herzegovina in interviewed subjects in of answers detected differences explainthe some of experience to line wesetby examining history. virtual followthis attitudes exactly with. Asfield operate different confirmed, research the inwe can of B&Hthat groups Croats between two border the virtual a provides uswith in of historical of examiningexperience andBosnia.Onitsown, Croats Herzegovina this fact characteristic” heritage andcultural-ethnologic Herzegovina isMediterranean with a region a “specific only confirmed and furthermore sealed their regional identity. Dodig therefore today claims andthis historical experience had adifferent in Croats Herzegovina demonstrated again over was Order firstonly loudandthe historiography visible clearly signthat recorded. 2005, pp 129 – 149 148 development of the two differing mentalities. The “Bariši Dodig, Radoslav (2005) “Hercegovina ili esej o etnik” movement in Herzegovina in WW II; compared to other Croats inin Croats other incompared B&H movement unique WW II; to etnik” Herzegovina Interviews, as already indicated, showed that Croats in likely less that showed Croats to are Herzegovina indicated, asalready Interviews, groups itHaving definedis thesetwo furthermoreuse possible try their to to historical a result is only identities regional and mentalities two these of existence Establishing History in History Croats Bosnia andinthefirst and chapter, over of Herzegovina, asseen 148 opposed to the rest of the country (B&H). country the of rest tothe opposed zemlji na zemlji 51 ü enaru “ in National Security The and Future 3-4 (6) ü Affair” and the split among the CEU eTD Collection have Herzegovinian onlyalienated from Croats straighten state, the their identity, regional for Yugoslavthe toolong state and of identity reminded their Croatian often.too Thiscould and more beingof even for Croats Herzegovina. Theyfeel hadbeen to denied of as part equal tochange early started during the 1970s. and years 20 over for on went continues, he This, all. at nationality Croatian of not often most filledfrom were and with positions Herzegovina Herzegovina.outside these people Usually judges medical in or personal become from teachers, couldn’t Croats Herzegovina Yugoslav Yugoslav People’s Army servein scholarships,the getto unable student to theywereunable from Croats Herzegovina: committed by the “Ustaše” regime during the war. by the regime“Ustaše” during committed the bear for burdenof responsibility the atrocities un-proportional Herzegovina to came 186 – 191 [ populated by Croats. joining movement percentage of was higherthen in “Ustaše” the region population anyother 151 Tone (1995) „Being Muslim the Bosnian Way“, Princeton University Pres, Princeton, bind young men of pp.different religion 60 andstrengthen - their75 sense of a common belonging.For seemore Bringe, unifying elements in Yugoslavia. Tone Bringe highlights experience of young men in JNA as one of those that 150 149 presence With “ of the strong rule. theexperienceof identity Communist was the this Croatian-Herzegovinian particular of componentidentity in so strong Herzegovina. is Croatian the understandwhy it behardto shouldn’t region; autonomous “Herceg-Bosna” self-proclaimed time a war in experience and rule; Communist of experience negative Cvitkovi Yugoslav People's Army [ Malcolm, Noel (2002) “Bosnia: A short history“, Pan Macmillan, London For overFor 20years in Croats Herzegovina hadbeen discriminated only for being Croats Cvitkovi Of these elements, probably the most important one in the last 50 years of for in important salience one last50 the themost probably Of elements, these eng. Croatian Identity in Bosnia and Herzegovina and Bosnia in Identity Croatian eng. ü , Ivan (2006) “Hrvatski identitet u Bosni iHercegovini“, Synopsis d.o.o., Zagreb and Sarajevo, pp. ü notes how Communist authorities systematically discriminated against discriminated systematically authorities Communist how notes 149 After the defeat of fascist forces and with them of aswell, “Ustaše” forcesthem andwith of fascist defeat of After the cro. 150 , police forces or be appointed to any public office. Furthermore, Jugoslavenska Narodna Armija -JNA ý etnik” movement in Herzegovina region induring WW the movementregion Herzegovina II, etnik” 151 52 ] ] was considered to be one ofthose beone to considered ] was CEU eTD Collection had on social ties in Bosnia and Herzegovina and expressed deep regret “that Republic“that had expresseddeepregret and of andHerzegovina on social inBosnia ties parliamentJosipovi president state address tothe one. controversial the first part of the 1990sfinal from why answer Croats muchHerzegovina so favour the“third entity” solution. and itsimplemented in Bosnia and Herzegovina on other.Thepolitical the shouldfactor provide the role in thefailed 1990spolitics sideandthe nationalism of one on the nature obsession”Croatian “state “Herceg-Bosna” mentioned already the linkedto extent a great isto this thesis of topic are the that attitudes autonomous region4.2. The Remainings of the Failed Politics is a next moves tothe factor. does from,this chapter aim “autonomy” comes of where have picture acomplete to reform. form However, of state favourable the makes a understanding believe why they thirdis entity necessary for their protection and therefore actually had never they (that other any a over chanceidentity Herzegovinian regional and Croat to their favour develop) still and why they feel endangered. It also brings Croatianus self-rule. closer to their problemslife and difficultlies in abreak upof Communistthe and Yugoslavia a embed thesenseof discrimination and insecurity init, andview maintain their thatsolution to The Croatian IvoJosipovi current president The in of of topic Republic involvement the inBosniathe Croatia Herzegovina of and differing of understanding contributesthose abetter to that factor The political Such historic in experience why for providesexplanation Croats today Herzegovina 53 ü talked about destructive effects the last war thelast destructive effects about talked ü visited Sarajevo on April Sarajevo visited 14,2010.Inhis on CEU eTD Collection tome, meni se je vrijeme da iskoristimo, da okupimo hrvatsko nacionalno bi nacionalno hrvatsko okupimo da iskoristimo, da je vrijeme smo iskoristili ovaj povijesni trenutak da stvorimo samostalnu Hrvatsku me Sarajevo, pp.88 [ 156 14, 2010. [ 155 2010. [ 154 “Mesi of of B&H. for partition inthe plans neverparticipated had Croatia adding aggressors”, oftheworld one from from isB&H from 1991 even clearer. PresidentTu Tu of meeting a of A transcript confirmation. final the only is Boban) Mate leader political their not (and B&H in Croats of behalf on Treaty Dayton the a neutral observer of the events in B&H. The fact that it was President Tu 153 Herzegovina”] facts”. historic “the were insisted these and Croatia ruling butwasleading stated that been hadnever aggressor HDZ) an adefensive war of of AndrijaHDZ, criticized Hebrang president Josipovi B&H” and this that is mainthe reasonwhyheleftHDZ and FranjoTu stolje April 14, 2010. (cro. “Duboko žalim što je i Republika Hrvatska svojom politikom u90-im godinama prošlog his predecessor Stjepan Stjepan hisMesi predecessor 152 it”. contributed in Croatia’s to politics 1990s the Lovrenovi Dauenhauer Jari Adriano, Milovan. “Kosor: Pozvat Pozvat “Kosor: Milovan. Adriano, Tuli Portal Jutarnji.hr. “Josipovi ü ü a tome doprinijela”); [ eng. “Kosor: I will call for Josipovi inSarajevo: Miloševi ü , Zlatko. “Mesi Leaving political debates aside, the facts show that Republic of Croatia was not merely wasnot of Republic Croatia show that facts aside,the debates political Leaving The response from the “other side” came when the prime minister Kosor (from (from Kosor the minister prime the when came side” “other from the The response within themaximumpossible borders. think itis[also]timetouse [the opportunity],togathertheCroatiannation moment tocreate aninternationally recognized independentCroatia, soI 155 eng. “Hebrang: Josipovi ü þ , I.,Luci ini, da sa jednom pametnom politikom možemo eng. “Transcripts on partition of Bosnia, the first book“ “Therefore, itseems to methat,we as tookadvantage of thishistoric ü , Nenad., “Hebrang: Josipovi ü ü , P.(2005) “Stenogrami o podjeliBosne, knjiga prve“, Kulturna rasvjeta-Civitas, Split- uSarajevu: Miloševi eng. “Josipovi ü ü and Tu se ispri ü introduced Croatia as one oftheworld aggressors!” ü ÿ stated “Miloševi that stated ü u Josipovi u man werer trying to divide B&H” þ ao za pokušaje Hrvatske da podijeliBosnu iHercegovinu.” ü ü ; Croatia was notaggressor in B&H” appologiesed for Croatian attempts todivide Bosnia and ü iTu ü ü jeHrvatsku uveo ured svjetskih agresora!.” a, Hrvatska nije bila agresor u BiH.“ agresor bila nije Hrvatska a, ÿ 154 manpokušavali podijeliti.” 54 At the same time, one of the prominent leaders 152 ÿ ü e u maksimalno mogu maksimalno e u man following:the stated Less then a month later in the same city same in the later month a then Less þ ak dovesti do toga - sa jednim pametnim ü ü and Tu by saying he “introduced heCroatia “introduced bysaying as ÿ man with representatives of HDZ of representatives with man ] ]: “Prema tome, ÿ unarodno priznatu, tako mislim da ÿ man were trying to divide man to were trying Ve ] þ ÿ ü ernji list im granicama. (...) Prema (...) granicama. im man. Jutarnji list ] þ ini mi se da, kao što ÿ 153 , May 4, 2010. [ man who signed Jutarnji list , April 15, Jutarnji list Jutarnji , April eng. , CEU eTD Collection identity“ continuity of depolitization“ Sarajevo, pp. 100 [ Pravni fakultet Sveu fakultet Pravni BiH: ustavni položaj, kulturni razvoj i nacionalni identitet“, Centar za demokraciju i pravo Miko Tripalo and 159 158 157 razgrani ovakvom nerješenom pitanju i sa tim gomilanjem armije - da -da armije gomilanjem tim i sa pitanju nerješenom ovakvom razgrani stated, that the minimum for borders himmeant 1939borders of the Banovina Hrvatska. Radi Božo branch of HDZ B&H’s of the vice-president the same the transcript, according to Lovrenovi pressure from international community. under only in1993andended and broke Croats Muslims between awar factthat undeniable legal basis a ofthisentity itsprovides foundation wasthat Presidency of conclusions of the and one for that unification hadbeenestablished region of factan Herceg-Bosna remains the that However, autonomous of its territories withpopulation outside ofit. the Republicsmaller of Croatia. portions Banovinamentioned in whole the chapter, included day first the present and Herzegovina of Central and Northern Bosnia leaving significant portion of Croatian Komši Goldstein, Ivo (1999) “Croatia: A History“, C.Hurst & Co. Lonodn,Ltd., pp. 128 - 130 Lovrenovi þ þ What Tu Impact of such politics and events on common people must have been significant. been have must people common on events and politics such of Impact sure. for be proved not can practice into put been ever had thoughts these Whether ] enja.” enjem, sporazumom sa Srbima u Bosni- da možemo dovesti do toga, da umjesto rata koji prijeti ü this army beapledgeof theimplementation suchof ademarcation.” army-even[more]tomake withsettled issueaccumulation ofthe and this we insteadofthe war canaccomplish [it], thatthreatens this from [not yet] accomplish –onesmart demarcationagreementwith in theSerbs Bosnia– (...) , Ivo, (2010) “Ustavnopravni položaj Hrvata nakon Daytona –kontinuitet depolitizacije“ in“Hrvati u ü ü emphasizes the education aspect revealing that Croatian children in Herceg-Bosna Croatian children that revealing aspect education the emphasizes , I.,Luci eng. “Transcriptseng. on partition of Bosnia, the firstbook“ Therefore, I think, that with we Ithink,that Therefore, caneven onesmartpolicy ÿ þ ilišta u Zagrebu, Zagreb pp. 7-21 [eng. 7-21 pp. Zagreb uZagrebu, ilišta man meant bythe “maximum borders” remainedpossible unclearbut ü , P.(2005) „Stenogrami o podjeliBosne, knjiga prve“, Kulturna rasvjeta-Civitas, Split- 158 in “Croats in B&H: constitutional status. Cultural development and national 55 “Constitutional status of Croats after Dayton – þ ak ta armija bude zalog provedbe takvog provedbe zalog bude armija ta ak ] 156 159 It is also an 157 As ü CEU eTD Collection Pravni fakultet Sveu fakultet Pravni BiH: ustavni položaj, kulturni razvoj i nacionalni identitet“, Centar za demokraciju i pravo Miko Tripalo and 161 identity“ continuity of depolitization“ country. Bosnia andHerzegovina istheirRepublic homeland and of only Croatia a neighbouring virtually agree subjects chapter,the in all the third of As for solvingpresented their problems. they itdealtwith by eventually Bosnia accepting and Herzegovina a frameworkas permanent the war now had to face new circumstances. Accordingmemory. to the results from collective erased the just have been couldn’t experienceHerceg-Bosna of However, of the field research, and Muslimsin1994. Croats aform and between renewed alliance the as of Herzegovina Bosnia of Federation the of establishment the with before even not if Dayton, after obvious different. They experienced it as the citizens of B&H, subjected to this state. war wascompletely and the of their experience leftout were andHerzegovina of Bosnia but as a region of the Croatian state. At the same time, numerous Croats in the remaining parts Sphere National Croatian of region a as felt longer no inHerceg-Bosna Croats that is policies B&H in their minds and thus lost their state subjectivity. Importance of these events and these that a significant amount of Croats who meansby itaccomplish feltall the (…)”. the same, at that moment sized to be regioncitizens (…) live of with the idea of the final unification withstatement of from one Croat Travnik stated that“(…) region who Croatian peoplein theTravnik Croatian state and are ready to 160 Croatiahomelandabout astheir and Tu used Croatian history learningtextbooks, history, aboutCroatian Croatian Geography and Komši Lovrenovi The people who expected/hoped to see Herceg-Bosna as part of by endof the Croatia see Herceg-Bosnaas part to expected/hoped The people who became illusion an wasonly state theCroatian of aregion as Herceg-Bosna That ] ü , Ivo, (2010) “Ustavnopravni položaj Hrvata nakon Daytona –kontinuitet depolitizacije“ in„Hrvati u ü , Ivan(2002) “Bosanski Hrvati“, Durieux, Zagreb, pp.166 - 167 [ þ ilišta u Zagrebu, Zagreb pp. 7-21 [eng. “ [eng. 7-21 pp. Zagreb Zagrebu, u ilišta in “Croats in B&H: constitutional status. Cultural development and national 161 Based on such and similar statements it can be argued ÿ manas their president. 56 Constitutional status of Croats after Dayton – eng. „The Bosnian Croats“ 160 Komši ü forwards a ] CEU eTD Collection members of andmemberslife necessarily religious/ethnic other sharing withthem of groups everyday is“experience identity Livingwith the Croat the in others”. the of Herzegovina Bosnia and the third entity, butlittle had been said on why they disagree with the “other side”. explaintried to in why Croats Herzegovina have Croatian strong identity forand why they opt in in for farfor Croats Croats andunattractive attractive Herzegovina Bosnia.chapter So this other” of the the“experience and Structure 4.3. Population frame holdHerzegovina andset up tothis they answer the question. political of elite like. Croat look should The state the of the reform how asked about when entity third/Croat the for opt inHerzegovina Croats why explains identity, Croatian entity. Croat the how they life’sitimproved, think and none mentioned be subjects the thecreation could of of everyday their of difficulties the confessing while stories, life their In media. mass and elite mentioned only by when conversation became framedthe by rhetoric forced the political the people. common implies lies for mainresponsibility not on on the elites and the that suchrequest political the of the remainings of butalso aresult the Croats and discriminated endangered the of historic experience of resultthe politics that created a only not B&H is within for the third entity request arguesthat This chapter was irreversible. an autonomous region of Herceg-Bosna. This It has been mentioned in the second chapter that one of the important characteristics of characteristics important the of one that chapter second in the mentioned been has It The remaining two factors are relevant because they explain why the alternatives are This factor, adding to the factor of the historic experience that conditioned strong is solution “third that entity” show clearly subjects interviewed of The answers the However, it seems that the process of de-subjectivization of one part of Croats in B&H 57 CEU eTD Collection 162 Map5. atthe look a quick Already in B&H. identity of Croatian the is characteristic a typical others” of the “experience claim that the to isit anovergeneralization that establish can easily one population, well. as experience lack does so the of someone’ssuch identity to characteristic addsaspecific others” the unique way tothe andadds asthey perceive themselves well.Asmuch the“experience of as experience makestheir reality. their This and theworld perceive people way the influences they were numericallywhere Sarajevo from west counties two in the Accept counties. numerous the of any almost largest group and the three counties south ofequal in numbers with a small Serbian population. the Zenica where they and to1Bosniak.Croats in county Mostar were Bosniaks is the Bosniak; Only 5Croats that inof theNorthern Herzegovinapart Croatian hada majority 1 predominant to with 8 Croats ethnic Croats and all six of them were Herzegovinian counties. In addition, two more counties ethnically 100% “pure”population. in thatarecoloured counties with “1” number colour one only with initcounties represent is. Those relationship whatthe andnumbersshow groups ethnic the relationship between onthe numerical of eachcounty Thecolour(s) the depends forand Bosniaks. green which represents one of the three mayor ethnic groups in B&H: red for Serbs, blue for Croats with. have experience” “the See Appendix 5 By examining the last population census from 1991 and ethnic structure of of the from 1991 andethnic structure census last population By examining the As opposed As haveto Herzegovinaindid in region,opposed Central majority Bosnia Croats not As it be map,seen in there can on were the only 1991populated six counties with more each colours, with countiesof The mapisintoarecoloured or one which divided 162 shows that in some parts of B&H there are simply no “others” to 58 CEU eTD Collection but with a different reality which is a reality of “the majority”. that’s a reality of a mixed community.lack of it. In this case, Croats in Bosnia base their opinion on Inwhat they see as thetheir reality and same way Croats or other” the the in of by “experience a extent conditioned isto great inthe Croats Herzegovina Herzegovina do the same because theexperience of Herzegovina majority being is apredominant foreign them.to ofin understandfrom unable andattitudes positions Croats interviewees Bosnia whowere to in an elementin presentquite the experiencesCroats Bosnia. goesfor of those Thesame “others”; the of element the lack that experiences on based are that positions (Herzegovinian) they did so because decidedgroups of twoCroats. the to evaluatebetween misunderstanding of a source isalso It andBosnia. in Herzegovina Croats between behaviourdifferences important most oneof makes the ontheother in Bosnia mixed communities of Croats in Bosnia is:none forhad The this they totalk about. simple not. explanation did Herzegovina from theirfrom subjects of majority while stories life intheir religion different of neighbours ownincluded group of two. the smaller the were they them of most in more, even and counties homogenous in living with mixedCroats Bosniaks. this, with Contrary to have inBosnia did Croats not any experience homogenouslived where inethnically The exception counties. only Mostar was the city of counties. minority were in Central were equal Bosniaks,Croats in all Bosnian other numberswith The support for reform the in favoured The by conceptssupport of Bosnia and state the Croats in“servile” Bosnia Croats as from described subjects WhenHerzegovina interviewed in life a and side one the on in Herzegovina neighbours non-Catholic the of lack The often Bosnia from subjects interviews in the that surprising not is it Therefore, Based onthe is1991 censusitmajority obvious invast that Croats of Herzegovina 59 CEU eTD Collection outside with results that are, least to say, questionable. the by from on entitiesconflict two pressure the inalatent butrather consensus suppressed isfoundednot see Itis state on been B&Hasa that chapters. crucial inprevious explained to have already formed was and Herzegovina Bosnia day present which under Circumstances makingdecision is but alsoin deeply embedded foundationvery the of state. the Yugoslavia and evenexpressed one his see wishhappen. to that just somelikebetter, county makefear the thingsthat expressed fall apart their would to be done should by whom say and what couldn’t of interviewees the Most forward. country institutionspush exception in believewithout andstate theircapability the central the to don’t all showedthat Interviews subjects future. andbelief inabetter clearly lackof that’s the inamong Croats andBosnia issomething Herzegovina that,paradoxically,shareall Croats society unstable 4.4. The by structure of the population.the inseems misunderstandingis conclude this caseconditioned that reasonable to predominantly B&H to understand each other’s positions but only to try to explain where it comes from. It problem at all fromsince, his/her perspective, nothing would change. be would a in why this Bosniadoesn’t understand sameAtthe majority. aCroat time, withlongerin Croats would have structure which no accept new absolute regions regional Lack of the consensus in Bosnia and Herzegovina is not only present in isof process Lack notonly the present consensusinBosnia and Herzegovina the of differences understand help that should factor important least the not but last The to unreasonable seems of Herzegovina probably hart in someonefor the Therefore, The aim of this thesis is not to offer a possible solution to this inability of Croats in 60 CEU eTD Collection Society, 21:4, p. 605 166 165 TKD Šahinpaši 164 elections. coming up on confirmed 163 comeCroats to ascitizens together of kindB&H andnotonly Croats? What as of cohesion incentive for can beseenas its What for providecitizens… andunable country to OHR,a then all other Balkan states together, a country that runs thanks to the international community exist is challenged notcitizens. from outside B&H is a country but from in a constantwithin, statea country of a latent that of OHR. intervention direct without andHerzegovina Bosnia conflict,has more a governmentscountry whose of international Itwouldcommunity. beimpossible tofind anyimportant law passed in right to legislation directly and todismiss elected government officials and civil servants” impose “has to EU administrator thepower Today, system Bosnia andHerzegovina. this of introduced The Office of The High Representative (OHR) as a powerful figure to political – right continuum (with the exception of SDP International Community” International of the madeRepresentative bythe High frequently most “decisions were inthat resulted reach amongconsensus its members onthemajority of itquestions was deciding upon” which builders” consensus poor Pejanovi As Professor citizens. Political totheir parties with answer communitiesethic basedprograms instead ethnic of Chandler, David (2007) “EU State building: Securing the LiberalPeace through EU Enlargement“, Global Ibid pp. 15 Pejanovi be to yet is success its but lines ethnic across votes attracts Herzegovina and Bosnia of Party Democrat Social This in short outlines what is Bosnia and Herzegovina today isThis in whatit outlines itsand Herzegovinashort Bosnia and today to offers what community international the it, of because precisely say to better or this, of all Above It is important to note that there are no relevant political parties along the left – centre ü , Mirko (2007) “The Political Development of Bosnia and Herzegovina in The Post-Dayton Period“, Post-Dayton in The Herzegovina and ofBosnia Development Political “The (2007) Mirko , ü , Sarajevo pp. 9 164 165 and later on concludes that thus “(t)he “(t)he parliament thus (…) did on that andlater concludes not . ü indicates, “(…) mono – ethnic parties revealed themselves as themselves – ethnicmono revealed “(…) parties indicates, 61 163 ) in legislative institutions across country.the across institutions ) inlegislative 166 on behalf CEU eTD Collection incentive to evenincentive to beyond look their differences. to be a state factor of Ascohesion. long asB&His froma step being afailed as state, longis asit of unable its citizens,pessimism and itjust might be too optimistic to expect any time soon for this to become a Croats in Herzegovinadifferences? and Croats toovercome Croats, caseto in this particular offer, asacountry andHerzegovina can Bosnia in Bosnia will not have At this moment, the only real thing that all Croats in Bosnia and Herzegovina share is share Herzegovina and inBosnia Croats all that thing real only the moment, this At 62 CEU eTD Collection 168 papers of Scientific conference on Fr. Grgo Marti centuries ofFr. Grgo Marti Znanstvenog skupa Fra Grgo Marti society. of strata the influenced all havemust that regions two the between differences socio-economic dichotomy geographical thebroader within Orderandwasnotaresultexistedof only and Džambo refers to as the dichotomy of the two worlds. what sealed and confirmed only Province Franciscan the of division administrative the to led 167 – Hungarian Austro the of arrival the even after beconfirmed will of nature Herzegovina brutal measures by which payingincreased authorities. the taxes provoked avoid to mountains the into fleeing started peasants Christian income crop low (traditionally) 19 the since least CONCLUSION Herzegovina and of Bosnia came to surface in the so calledin “Bariši so surface the to came Bosnia and of Herzegovina of Franciscans the of mentalities different and traditions monastery different chapter, strong and deeprelationship thelocal with As Catholic population. first explained in the their as well as is undisputable, B&H today’s of territory the on Catholicism of preservation uniqueeach historical memories experiences inand collective its own way. their ways,making in indifferent in Bosnia and Croats Croats Herzegovina occasions treated 19 Malcolm, Noel (2002) “Bosnia: A short history“, Pan Macmillan, London: pp. 132 Džambo, Jozo. “Stolje Jozo. Džambo, th century Franciscan Order split to the War of Yugoslav Succession history several history War the of on Franciscan Yugoslav to Succession Order split century As opposed to Christians in inBosnia, midthe 70’sin highland Herzegovina, dueto The history of Croats/Catholics in Bosnia and Herzegovina is without any doubt, at The importance of the presence of the Franciscan Order and their work for the for work their and Order Franciscan the of presence the of The importance th century, a history more century, less a history andFrom of a constant or visible duality. the ü e fra. Grge Marti Grge fra. e ü : The dichotomy of the worlds oftheFranciscans of Silver Bosnia.” Collection of ü i njegovo doba, Zagreb, 8. - 9. studenog 1995. ü a: Dihotomija svjetova franjevaca Bosne Srebrene.“ Bosne franjevaca svjetova Dihotomija a: ü and his era 63 ] 167 It would It be think naïve to this ü Affair”. The crisisthat The Affair”. (1996): 48 -50. [ 168 This rebellious Zbornik radova eng. “The eng. CEU eTD Collection 170 169 itmuch more just then ageographical term. making regional of border of identitiestwo inBosnia part Herzegovina the andHerzegovina, excluded a significant amount of Croats in Bosnia. autonomous region officially established as a form of protection of Croats in B&H although it result of this would be the devastating ways. most The inthey inview reality different that Bosniashowed andCroats establishment of the “Croatfaced with a common enemy and same threat of (physical) Community elimination, Croats in Herzegovina of Herceg though Even thecountry. engulfed that war the and 1990’s the with came andHerzegovina – Bosna”, an citizens on the basis of their ethnicity. assecondclass and were treated citizenship full their Yugoslav exerciseallowed tothe to not were Herzegovinaconsequences they wereunique. Croats suffered in Yugoslavia Communist the importantly, more even and war the of experience Herzegovinian the chapter, theHowever, Yugoslavthroughout state. been asit inhas the firstexplained the fourth and with Croatia while the rest of the Bosnia and its Croats were left out. were unifiedits Herzegovina in Croats shared. This 1939when and already change would itin interwarthe period (oppression of firstthe Yugoslavia) is something all Croats in B&H would even deteriorate with the WW I. The experience of a harsh life during the war and after difficultlife of in peasants Herzegovina would notchange in years cometo andlife conditions army “robbers”with socalledthe and attacking gendarme posts army positions. Ibid pp. 241 - 249 Malcolm, Noel (2002)“Bosnia: A short history“,Macmillan, Pan London: pp.138 - 139 The differing historic experience accompanied by particular mentalities constructed a mentalities constructed by particular accompanied historic experience The differing The final and the most recent manifestation of differences among Croats in Bosnia The Warwas World of Second it andconsequences approaching befelt would 64 170 169 The CEU eTD Collection share some common characteristics. common some share to believes that community imagined of an a sense in used is term The another. into state of any interference 172 does not exist but rather to prove it is actually the Serb element. 171 joining in with Croatia newa possibility and with of acceptedthe Herzegovina Croats time together Herceg-Bosna wassuspended Bosnia andHerzegovina. Republic Croatia and of between borders state the with coincide State National Croatian of borders the that confirmed number in of Croats excluded.Bosnia exactly on 1939“Cvetkovi the thatcouldarguments beheardin join1990s basedthe of rightHerceg-Bosna to Croatia unified with Croatia while significantnumber inCroats of Bosnia “outside”.remained Some just 1939 thisof partially since andsmall parts changed but Bosnia Herzegovina only the such aims and desires could have been heard among the eliteSphere of the Revival National Croatian the of part become they Thus Croats. Movement.became movement, mainstream In the adelaycomparedconsequently, Croatian to the andalthough Movement Revival with As ithas beenin length argued in Catholics secondchapter, the ininto” were B&H “caught itseems, samething. neverthe was, Herzegovina (of etc.). Herzegovina identities regional above layer a be would identity Croatian “onion”, Gellner’s Looking at national identities. separate present two not identity and do Croatian broader The word „sphere“ is not used to describe any kind of sphere of influence that might justify cross border cross justify might that influence of of sphere any kind describe to used not is „sphere“ word The Indeed, some Serb nationalist writers did try to contest it but not for the sake of proving that Croat element 172 The Dayton treaty and the international recognition of Bosnia and Herzegovina of recognition international the and The Dayton treaty although State National Croatian of the become part not did they time, same the At contested. been never has B&H in Catholics of identity the of component Croat The a within exist differences these that noted be should it tradition Gellenerian abest In in a same way Swiss Germans are part of the German National Sphere. Although they all are Croats, being aCroat in Bosnia beingand a Croat in ü -Ma þ ek” agreement. Again, suchideas would leave significant 65 171 CEU eTD Collection 174 173 manifesttoday and within whatkind offramework did they develop is, thereis nodoubt, different. Would such loop make much any or sense? because inattitudes theyare Croats have different andHerzegovina followwould that Bosnia wouldbe completely insufficientand answer actually wouldn’t any “why” the of questions. It in for bases, they Herzegovina thirdopted the entity and bases. ethnic economic purely on B&H of regionalization favored interviewees in Bosnia While state. reform the of respecttothe with confirmed been had Thedifferences also bigCroats”. as “the in while in “servile” to Bosnia aspeople nature, referred of those Bosnia Croats Herzegovina in in manifests toeach Croats in way the often of other. refer Croats they spoke Herzegovina Herzegovinian”. Contrary into this, usedHerzegovina 14of 14 subjects the “the andterms Croat” “the ways three in of one the themselves to referring and werepredominantly in Fojnice Sarajevo subjects from those unlike Herzegovina, However, asits maincharacteristic. marked Catholicism and identity Croatian their expressed exception without subjects the of All identities. regional regions followed line two andthe between the two of the indivision Differences attitudes 2010 inMostar and Me thing. same the been reality. beingin Indeed, aCroat Bosnia beingin aCroatand couldHerzegovina have never Cro. “Hercegovac“ Cro. In most cases, subjects used all of the terms. Establishing where the differences are, how they manifested in the past, how they how past, in the manifested they how are, differences the where Establishing levels different on differences the establishing by just differences such explain To Interviews also showed that Croats of B&H are aware of these differences which That this muchisvery so, confirmed of the interviewsinresults conducted the April 173 : as “the Catholics”, as “the Catholic Croats” or as “the Bosnian Croats”. as“the Bosnian or Croats” as “the Catholic : as“the Catholics”, 174 ÿ ugorje inugorje HerzegovinaFojnice Sarajevoand and inBosnia. 66 CEU eTD Collection neighbors in Herzegovina on sidelife in and one the in a mixedcommunities on Bosnia the should like. look how state reform the of the entity askedabout when for thethird/Croat Herzegovina opt Bosna. the previous Thisadds to dimension by in furthermore why explaining Croats also a result of the remainings notof the onlypolitics a result that created of thean autonomous historic region experience of Herceg- ofalso shed some lightthe on why they believe third entity endangeredis necessary for their protection. and It discriminated underdevelop)as though threat. constant had andwhythey neveract achanceto actually they (that other any over identity Croats Herzegovinian regional and Croat their favor still today but in inprovidedCroatian identity for It whyCroats Herzegovina. explanation Herzegovina disagreements. ongoing in of their B&H andreasons of Croats whole picture moremoreleast onesegmentof providing andtogether understandingdifferences and a at explaining each dimension with explanation a four-dimensional offered therefore chapter forth issues. The onparticular disagree in andHerzegovina Bosnia why answered nor Croats materialize. differences and these how where itdevelopedshaped how and inB&H.Finally,third on the empirical provided one some data identity national Croatian how explaining by division the of context the provided one second how Croats in Herzegovina in division of Croats chapterprovidedhistoricalB&H. Thefirst demonstrating background andthis Croats thesis. Thein aimBosnia of theseimportant for understanding why do they occur. Thischapters was the aim theof firsthad three chapters of different was to, each in its historical own segment; help understandexperience. the The The population structure dimension ascertained that the lack of the non-Catholic the of lack the that ascertained dimension structure population The The political dimension indicates that the request for the third entity within B&H is The historical dimension emphasized that the historic experience conditioned strong none of However, differences providedthese the for presented, possible explanations 67 CEU eTD Collection Herzegovinians?) The Future conditioned by the historic experience, influence of the political elite, structure of influence of the structure elite, political by the experience, conditioned historic the differing notions of realities should not be a surprise. It is precisely in these differingConsidering mentioned dimensions four the chapter, in fourth the existence of the twothe notions other. to eveneach more, andeven understand an agreement come in to into findit difficultand Bosnia realities, Croats Herzegovina Because of different Herzegovina andinBosnia ofits whichisbehind attitudes population. differing a mainreason in realities different conditioned state, the of instability ongoing the and of population the inthey share. them state between the link a see and differences their beyond look even to incentive have not will in Bosnia Croats in and itsbeHerzegovina Croats aslongis astate citizens, of to asit state, unable failed 175 mother. a real to opposed as “stepmother” as a itmakes difficult develop to any“warm” it. feelingstowards Lu the society as a whole. Its chronic inability general. in relations to functionmajority-minority concerning properly and provideminorities with and groups a status of regional majority havedo differentattitudes andforviews its citizens with groups of with that regional a status fact areinconsistence the answers intheinterviews findHerzegovinait andBosnia so difficultunderstand Their eachother’s positions. to experience being of majority inpredominant in Herzegovina from explains why Croats a sourceofmisunderstanding among them. inbeing Theexperience of Bosnia minority and other makes one of the most important differences between the two groups of Croats and also Lu þLü As Brubaker noted, groupness is a result of the way people perceive their reality. their perceive people way the of is a result groupness noted, As Brubaker manipulation structure of the elites, historicalthe different the experiences, Therefore , Ivo. “Ima li Hercegovine? (Tko i zašto negira Hercegovinu iHercegovce?).” Hercegovinu negira i zašto (Tko Hercegovine? li “Ima Ivo. , The last dimension provides insight into the current situation of the state of B&H and 3-4, no. 6(2005): 37– 86.[ ] eng. Isthere Herzegovina?( Who and why denies Herzegovina and 68 175 As long as B&H is a step from being a þLü refers to the state refers state tothe of B&H National Security and CEU eTD Collection future thesis. future holds the answer to differences among them. How to overcome itis a question leftfor some in theirunderstanding Croats realities B&H perceive differentways they that Iconclude do. only to provide a betterdifferences understanding among ofCroats those indifferences Bosnia and Herzegovinaand why they manifestthat clearly the wayexist. The intention was seem, continues in seem, 20 the continues attitudes between Croats in B&H.population and the permanent stateinstabilityThe that one should seekdichotomy for the sources of different of the worlds of Croats in B&H, it would The aim of this thesis was never to offer a possible solution for overcoming these th century as well 69 CEU eTD Collection BIBLIOGRAPY D.C: Brookings Institution Press, 2000. Daalder, Ivo H. d.o.o., 2006.[ Cvitkovi identity development andnational Identity inBosnia and Herzegovina. Croats in B&H: constitutionalstatus, Cultural pravo MikopravoTripalo and PravnifakultetSveu Chandler, David. kulturni razvoj inacionalniidentitet Cvitkovi Rienner Publishers Inc.,2001. K. and Carter. Charles M., Elizabeth Cousens, 2000. Enlargement”. Chandler, David. “EU State building: Securing the Liberal Peace through EU Brubaker, Rogers. Bringe, Tone. ManchesterYork: University 2003. Press, Bellamy, J. Alex. onFr. conference Grgo Marti Scientific Bosnia andHerzegovina inthetime the of Grgo father Marti - 9.studenog1995. Marti Babi Jutarnji list no. 6(2005):87– 127. [ An najavio-ispriku-izgovorneu-u-bih/719023 Adriano, Milovan. “Kosor: Pozvat þLü ü ü , Marko.“ Politi , Mladen. “Što jeBosnabezHercegovine?” “Što , Mladen. a.“ ü ü , Ivan. , Ivan. Zbornik radova Znanstvenog skupa FraGrgo Marti , April 15, 2010. eng. Croatian Identityin Bosnia andHerzegovina Being Muslim Being Muslim the Bosnian Way Global Society Hrvatski identitet u Bosni i Hrvatski identitetuBosni Hercegovini. Hrvatski identitetuBosnii Hercegovini. Hrvatiu BiH: ustavnipoložaj, Getting to Dayton: The Making of America’s BosniaPolicy Bosnia: Faking Democracy After Faking DemocracyBosnia: After Dayton The Formation ofCroatian National Identity Ethnicity without Groups (1996):29–30. [ þ ke i prilikekulturne uBosni i Hercegovini u doba fra Grge eng. is “What Bosnia without Herzegovina?” http://www.jutarnji.hr/jadranka-kosor--ivo-josipovic-nije-mi- 21, vol. 593 4,(2007): –607 ] ü . Markeši u Josipovi eng. “Political andCulturalcircumstances in ü andhisera (accessed May (accessedMay 22, 2010) 70 . Cambridge: Harvard . Cambridge: University Press, 2004. þ ü , Princeton: Princeton University Pres, 1995. ilišta uZagrebu, 2010.[ ü , Luka. Zagreb: Centar za demokraciju i Toward Peace inBosnia a, Hrvatska nije bila agresor uBiH.“ National Security andTheFuture ] Zagreb and Sarajevo: Synopsis Sarajevo: and Zagreb . London: PLUTO PRESS, ü .” ü . Manchester and New injegovodoba, Zagreb,8. ] Collection papers of of ] eng. Croatian . London: Lynne London: . . Washington, 3-4, CEU eTD Collection Hungarian administration 1878–1914 1914 Karamati 1991. provincijalat, [ They saidaboutBosniaandBosnianFranciscans Karamati Ivankovi Institutions Imamovi [ Gavran, Ignacije. Goldstein, Ivo. Gazi, Stephan. rije Gellner, Ernest. Gavran, Ignacije. New York: Palgrave, 2004. Nation, andState. IdentityPolitics in a Multilingual Age. Garde,Paul. onFr. conference Grgo Marti Scientific dichotomy oftheworldsthe Franciscans of ofSilver Bosnia.”Collectionof papers of 8. -9.studenog 1995. Srebrene.“ Džambo, Jozo. “Stolje [ agresora!.” edge” Future Džaja, M.Sre Džaja, hrvatsku-uveo-u-red-svjetskih-agresora/716549 Dauenhauer Jari Dodig, Radoslav. “Hercegovina ili esej o eng. Companionsof theBosnian History eng. Catholicism in Bosnia and Herzegovina þ i,[ 1988. . Sarajevo: Svijetlo rije ] 3-4, no. 6 3-4, (2005): 129– 149. [ ü ü ü ü , Željko. , Mustafa. , , Marko. , Marko. Zbornik radova Znanstvenog skupaFraGrgoMarti . Sarajevo: “Magistrat“ Sarajevo, 2006. Jutarnji list Unity andPlurality inthe Serbo-Croatian LinguitsicSphere. Language, eng. Paths andPointers:articles Series of onour history] ü ko. A Croatia: A HistoryCroatia: A ü Nations and nationalism , Nenad. “Hebrang:Josipovi , Nenad. Suputnici bosanske povijesti Putovi iputokazi:Niz Katoli Rekli suoBosni i bosanskim franjevcima Franjevci BosneSrebrene austrougarska uvrijeme uprave 1878– Franjeva Bosnia andHerzegovina: EvolutionofItsPolitical andLegal eng. Franciscan Province Silver Bosnia (1996): 48 -50. [ ü , April 14, 2010. e fra. Grge Marti þ anstvo uBosniiHercegovini þ þ i, 1992. [ ka provincijaBosnaSrebrena . London: C. Hurst & Co. Ltd., 1999. . New York: Barnes & Noble, 1973. eng. Herzegovina oressay onthe “land onthe eng. eng. “Thecenturies Fr. GrgoMarti of ] ü þ http://www.jutarnji.hr/hebrang--josipovic-je- ü . Ithaca, N.Y.: Cornell University Press, 1993. andhisera lanaka o našoj prošlosti ] a: Dihotomija svjetova franjevaca Bosne zemlji na 71 Franciscans ofSilver Bosnia underAustro- ] ü . Sarajevo –Zagreb: Svijetlo rije je uveou redsvjetskih Hrvatsku (accessed May 2010) 22, ] ü enaru ] . Sarajevo: HKD Napredak,1997. Judit, Tony, Lacorne Denis. .“ . Sarajevo: Franjeva . Sarajevo: Rabic, 2002. [ ] National Security andThe ü i njegovo doba, Zagreb, . Sarajevo: Svijetlo ü : The þ þ i, 2010, ki eng. CEU eTD Collection Narodne Novine. “Ustav Republike Hrvatske: Izvorišne osnove.” Malcolm, Noel. Malcolm, Who andwhy denies Herzegovina andHerzegovinians?) National Security andThe Future Lu Kulturna rasvjeta-Civitas, 2005.[ Lovrenovi Lovrenovi Croatia (1941-1945) Crkvana kamenu,2006.[ Kreši papesr of Scientific papesr conference onFr.of Grgo Marti (1996): 59 - 64 (1996): [ Znanstvenog skupa Fra Grgo Marti Koruni identity depolitization. Croats inB&H: constitutionalstatus, Culturaldevelopment andnational Zagrebu, 2010.[ Dayton Period Pejanovi the state Olui Zagreb: Centar zademokracijui MikoTripalo pravo and Pravni fakultet Sveu Hrvati uBiH:ustavni položaj, kulturni razvoj inacionalni identitet knjižnica ,1992.[eng. Komši unstable state Zagreb: Politi Niki novine.nn.hr/clanci/sluzbeni/232289.html Kasapovi þLü ü ü ü , Stevan. , Andrija. , , Ivo. “Ima, Ivo. i i li Hercegovinu (Tko zašto negira Hercegovine? Hercegovce?).” , Milenko ü ü ] , Ivo. , Petar. “Fra. Grgo Marti . Boulder European Monographs, :East 2007. ü ü , Mirko. ü ü , Mirjana. , Ivan. , , I.,and P. Luci Ustavnopravni položajHrvata nakonDaytona –kontinuitet depolitizacije þ ] . Sarajevo: TKDŠahinpaši Bosnia andHerzegovina :identity, nationalistlandscapes ofand the future ka culture, 2005. [ . Crkvaidržava uNezavisnoj Državi Hrvatskoj (1941.-1945.) Hercegova Bosnia: Ashorthistory eng. “Fr. GrgoMarti eng. Constitutional statusofCroats afterDayton – continuity of Bosanski Hrvati The Political Development of Bosnia andHerzegovina inThePost- Bosna iHercegovina: Podijeljenodruštvo inestabilna država ] Herzegovina martyrs: Franciscan 1524–1945 eng. TheChurch andthe State inThe Independent Stateof ü þ . ki franjeva Stenogrami opodjeliBosne, knjigaprva ü eng. Bosniaand Herzegovina: society thedivided and eng. Transcripts onpartition ofBosnia, the book first 3-4, no. 6 (2005): 37 – 86. [ i Hrvatski Nacionalni Pokret.“ . Zagreb: 2002[ Durieux, ü injegovodoba, Zagreb,8. - 9.studenog1995. ü andCroatian NationalMovement.”Collection of þ . London: Pan Macmillan, 2002. ki mu ü 72 , 2007. þ enici: 1524 – 1945 1524– enici: ü andhisera ] eng. The Bosnian Croats eng. IsthereHerzegovina?( ] Zbornik radova http://narodne- . Markeši . Mostar: Franjeva . Split-Sarajevo: . ] ü , Luka. þ ilišta u . Mostar: . ] ] þ . ka CEU eTD Collection May 4, 2010. Agencija i za statistiku Bosne Hercegovine. Web (in alphabetical pages order) Sorabji, Cornelia. Sorabji, 2009 [ Zovak, Jerko. HerzegovinaEnigma: Bosniaand Politics, Society,Foreign Relations San Tuli Ramet, P. Sabrina, Konrad Clewing, and Reneo Luki Hercegovinu.” Žepi identity development andnational andHerzegovina.(Croats)in Bosnia CroatsinB&H: constitutionalstatus, Cultural Federalni zavod zastatistiku. Federalni zavod of Statistics Bosnia and Herzegovina] podijeliti-bih-clanak-135474 Raguž, Željko. (accessed May 22, 2010) sarajevu-se-ispricao-za-sudjelovanje-hrvatske-u-pokusajima-podjele-bih-/714907 Portal “Josipovi Jutarnji.hr. Sveu Markeši Hrvatska, 1993.[ Hrvatska, (1996-2008). Vukši Stražemanac, Ivan. Povijest franjeva 1994. institutionalized violence þ ü ü evi þ , Zlatko. “Mesi , Božo. ü ilišta uZagrebu,[ 2010. eng. TheWar inThe Bosnian Posavina region 1992 , Tomo. ü ü , Zdravko. , Luka.Zagreb: Centarzademokracijui MikoTripalo pravo and Pravni fakultet Enigma: Bosna Enigma: Bosna i Hercegovina Hrvati uBiH: ustavni položaj, kulturni razvoj inacionalni identitet http://www.vecernji.hr/vijesti/mesic-sarajevu-milosevic-tudman-pokusavali- Rat u Bosanskoj Posavini 1992 Jutarnji list Ve Demografski pregledDemografski na stanje Katolika (Hrvata) uBosniiHercegovini eng. TheHistory theof Franciscan Province TheSilver Bosnia ü A verymodernWar Vi Pogled u Bosnu ü uSarajevu: Miloševi ÿ eno . Watson, H., and R., Hinde. London and New York: I.B. Tauris, . Mostar: Crkva na kamenu, 2008. [ , April 14, 2010. ü seispri (accessedMay 22, 2010) http://www.fzs.ba eng. Demographic overviewthe situation of ofCatholic ] ] . München: R.Oldenbourg Verlag, 2008. . Zagreb:[ Naprijed, 1998. þ þ ao za pokušaje da Hrvatske ao podijeli i Bosnu ke provincije Bosne Srebrene. Zagreb: Matica . War: acruelnecessity: thebases of 73 ü . Mostar: , 2002. [ i Tu http://www.jutarnji.hr/ivo-josipovic-u- http://www.bhas.ba/new . Slavonski Brod: Posavska Hrvatska d.o.o., [ ÿ eng. Federal Statistics Office for man pokušavali podijeliti.” ü . Croatia sinceIndependence:War, ] eng. Alreadyseen eng. Aview into Bosnia [ eng. Agency for Agency Ve eng. ] þ ] . ernji list ] ] , CEU eTD Collection Hrvatsko Kulturno Društvo “Napredak”.Hrvatsko the Blessed Virgin Mary http://www.franjevci.info Hercegova Bosnia] Silver - Cross Holy the of Exaltation http://www.bosnasrebrena.ba/v2010/index.php Franjeva þ ka provincija Uzvišenja sv. Kriza Bosnaka provincija Uzvišenja Srebrena. þ ka franjeva ] [ þ ka provincija uznesenja Blažene Djevice Marije. Blažene Djevice uznesenja ka provincija eng. HerzegovinianFranciscanProvince oftheAssumption of http://napredak.com.ba 74 [ eng. Franciscan Province of the of Province Franciscan CEU eTD Collection http://www.welt-atlas.de/datenbank/karten/karte-1-558.gif Herzegovina. Visual Scale. [map]. and Herzegovina” “Map of Bosnia Map 1.Bosnia andHerzegovina Appendix 1 75 (May20,2010) Atlas of The World: and Bosnia Atlas of CEU eTD Collection Draganovi ü , K.Stj. “Banovina Hrvatska,1939.-1941.” [mapIn: San 18]. Pogled uBosnu Map 2. The map of “” . Zagreb: Naprijed,(pp. 82) 1998. Appendix 2 76 þ evi ü , Zdravko. CEU eTD Collection Goldstein, Ivo. “IndependentState of Croatia 1941 -1945.” [map]. In: Goldstein, Ivo. Croatia: AHistory Map 3. The map of the Independent State of Croatia . London: C. Hurst &Co. Ltd., 1999. (pp. 132) Appendix 3 77 CEU eTD Collection Herzegovina. “ Dejtonska karta Bosne i Hercegovine i kartaBosne Dejtonska http://www.dw-world.de/image/0,,3471801_1,00.jpg Map 4. Map of the post-Dayton Bosnia Appendix 4 ” [map]. Visual Scale. Visual [map]. ” 78 Deutsche Welle : Bosnia and Welle: Bosnia Deutsche (May 22, 2010) CEU eTD Collection Zdravko. Draganovi Pogled uBosnu ü , K. Stj. “Konfesionalna karta Bosne i San Bosne 17].In: [map Hercegovine.” “KonfesionalnaK. karta Stj. , Map 5. The ethnic composition of andBosnia Herzegovina in 1991 . Zagreb: Naprijed, 1998.(pp.79) Appendix 5 79 þ evi ü ,