War-ravaged Bosnia has come a long way since the 1995 Dayton Accord. But Bosnia's stability rests on the West's large-scale involvement. Integration remains an unfulfilled hope. When foreign aid tapers off, as it soon will, Bosnia's economy will grind to a halt without major reforms. The world should safeguard Dayton's biggest success -- ending Europe's bloodiest war since World War II -- but hand Bosnia's political and economic future back to Bosnians.
Ivo H. Daalder is Senior Fellow at the Brookings Institution. He served on the National Security Council during President Clinton's first term. Michael B.G. Froman is Senior Fellow at the Council on Foreign Relations and Resident Fellow at the German Marshall Fund. He recently served as the Treasury Department's Chief of Staff.
A FOUR-YEAR CHECKUP
A visitor to Sarajevo is struck by how far this city and country have come since Bosnia's brutal war ended just four years ago. This once-beautiful city that dominated headlines for much of the first half of this decade has seen significant reconstruction. Many of its facades are freshly painted, apartment complexes have been repaired, new houses have been built, the inner city bustles with activity, and the innumerable cafes are filled with animated conversation. And yet, it is also immediately apparent how far Bosnia still is from recovery. Nationalist politics and ethnic differences continue to dominate every aspect of daily life. The line dividing Bosnia's two entities is still regarded by nearly all who live there as a "border" separating friendly from unfriendly territory. What little economic activity exists directly relies on the foreign assistance that has flooded in since the 1995 Dayton Accord. But without substantial reforms, it would grind to a halt as soon as the foreign aid dried up.
Bosnia's post-Dayton reality is a complex one. Although the country has moved a long way from its war-shattered past, it still functions only because the international community has poured vast resources into it. Whatever progress has been achieved in Bosnia is due to the untiring efforts of foreign soldiers, diplomats, and aid workers to provide security for all individuals, to cajole and persuade the country's leaders to move forward one small step at a time, and to assist in the rebuilding of the physical and psychological infrastructure that was devastated by more than three years of war. Instead of moving toward self-sustaining peace and economic growth, the country's economy, politics, and even its security remain firmly dependent on foreign, rather than Bosnian, efforts.
This is a premium article
You must be a Foreign Affairs subscriber to continue reading. If you are already a print subscriber, click here to activate your online access.
Log In
Buy PDF
Buy a premium PDF reprint of this article.Related
Richard Holbrooke's gripping memoir shows how he improvised a makeshift peace in what was left of Bosnia despite a timorous Pentagon, a reluctant president, waweirding allies, and brutal ethnic cleansers. But the Dayton Accord came too late.
Peace in the Balkans depends on economic stability and prosperity for all. To overcome the legacies of failed economic reforms and ethnic strife, southeastern Europe needs nothing short of a European "New Deal." Sound money and free trade can take root in the Balkans only if the EU expands the euro and its trade arrangements to the region promptly, with no strings attached. But the EU's current approach, which attaches conditions to membership in its elite clubs, falls far short.
In Waging Modern War, General Wesley Clark describes how NATO bested Serbia -- just barely -- in the organization's first-ever shooting war. With confused priorities, a reluctant military, and overweening lawyers, the alliance was scarcely up to the task.
