I spent only 7 months in Bosnia (Sarajevo) - absolutely beautiful! The countryside is breath-taking and I found the people very friendly. My heart is still there and I must find a way back - that's my problem. Now to the question. In your opinion is it possible to have peace in BiH and the country to stand on its own (Peace being no foreign soldiers in the country while at the same time having no significant increase in violence) under the current General Framework for Peace/Dayton I? Or is Dayton II or III needed?
Rodger Rudolph
US Citizen
Answer Rodger,
Thanks for the great question. I am also an American citizen but I am Macedonian ethnically (not Bosnian or Serb). The region is very beautiful and people are warm once they trust you and if you can see beyond the poverty. I am glad that you had as pleasant of an experience as possible while there. About peace... I will say no to lasting peace. Why? Not Dayton I or any future agreements but because the effects of WWI. The great powers did a poor job in grouping people who have not and will not get along into one country. Tito kept a lid on it and his iron fist was a bit positive in that respect. However now ethnic tensions flare again and even more so that self-determination is on the line. Macedonia will be pivotal and more important than the Bosnian piece... why? WWI technically pivoted around the Macedonian question. And because in Bosnia it was only a culture issue and they were not seen as intruders. In Macedonia you have rebel insurgents coming over, over populating, and then demanding political change. The whole region is unstable and will be as long as the borders and sides are in flux. I am biased on this issue but from a historical standpoint I say it is only going to get worse. Hopefully I am wrong.
