The end of the fighting in Bosnia after the vicious bloodletting involving all three ethnic groups was the result of innovative arm twisting diplomacy that produced the Dayton agreement. Each step of the way since then has been strewn with pitfalls. The cancellation of a meeting in Bonn last week intended to remove the obstacles to a genuine federation of Muslims and Croats in Bosnia has underlined the depth of suspicion and lack of political will that make it difficult to be optimistic about the prospects of a lasting peace.
When it was formed two years ago at the prompting of the United States and Germany, the federation was designed not only to end hostilities between Bosnian Croats and Muslims, but to pave the way to a permanent solution by creating a counterbalance to the Bosnian Serbs. It has no significant popular or political support in either ethnic community, and is vulnerable to the nationalism of President Franjo Tudjman of Croatia who has never abandoned his hope of developing institutional links with the Bosnian Croats. The Muslims, too, are wary and there have been reports that both sides have recently returned to ethnic cleansing.
Virtually none of the attributes of a federal state has been established in the last two years. Agreements on paper have still to be translated into a joint administrative machine, political institutions and a common. customs system; these and other issues, such as the leadership of the federal defence forces, and matters ranging from education to state symbols, remain deadlocked. There are few signs of the reconciliation between Muslims and Bosnian Croats which is the necessary precondition for mutual concessions.
If the federation fails to make progress, there must be serious doubts about the viability of the larger agreement covering the whole of Bosnia of which it is an integral part. The detailed commitments made at Dayton are still mostly aspirational: ground has been grudgingly ceded and, as in the case of the Serb suburbs of Sarajevo, there has been considerable destruction in the process. Freedom of movement, which all sides guaranteed, is widely ignored, hampering the return of refugees, and entrenching the power of local militias in border areas. Pressure by the five nation contact group to link the handing back of prisoners and economic aid has not so far been successful, and a question mark hangs over the donor conference to be held in Brussels later this month.
If it was thought at Dayton that carefully balanced formulas and guarantees of security and financial help would unlock the dynamism to create a new and positive situation in Bosnia, it is clear from the frustration of spokesmen in Bonn and Washington that a different assessment is now being made. But if this does not lead to a rethinking of policy on the ground for Ifor troops, who have no authority to enforce freedom of movement or other agreed principles against local, opposition, the huge post war commitment by the international community runs the risk of being as ineffective as its intervention during the war itself.