What are the most effective methods of reuniting ethnically divided cities in post-war Bosnia (BiH)? This paper by the European Center for Minority Issues (ECMI) uses the examples of Brcko and Mostar to examine different international approaches to ‘reuniting’. It suggests that less formal systems of power-sharing are more successful than complex consociationalism and territorial fragmentation. It also argues that institution-building prior to elections results in greater stability and more integration. Furthermore, institutional design at the local level can have a significant impact on inter-ethnic relations in deeply divided societies.
Until the imposed unification in early 2004, Mostar was governed by a high degree of formal power-sharing and Brcko was a united, discrete district administered by a low degree of formal power-sharing. The differential impact of international intervention in the governance of these two cities was greatest at the time when Brcko became an independent district and Mostar still struggled with its administrative divisions. Since the international administration has taken a tougher approach to centralising authority in Mostar, the gap between the two cities has decreased, reflecting the increasing convergence of their institutional frameworks as well as larger BiH-wide trends.
The differences between the two cities nevertheless remain stark. Brcko has exceeded the rest of BiH in terms of average salaries and economic opportunities, whereas Mostar has lagged behind with high unemployment and less than average salaries. Both cities have been the target of extensive international aid, assistance and intervention since the end of the war, but it appears that the resources invested have yielded more tangible results in Brcko. The relative success of the district has been conditioned by several factors:
- The fully-fledged protectorate was enhanced by considerable international resources and tax advantages over the rest of BiH.
- This enabled the international administration to integrate the city fully and pay higher salaries for civil servants. This factor contributed to the success of integration but not necessarily to its sustainability.
- By creating an autonomous district, directly administered by an international appointee, Brcko was divorced from power-struggles. However, entity parties dominate and social and cultural life remains divided by ethnicity.
- The firm division of Mostar was reinforced by the struggle for control over power and resources in the canton and in FBiH at large.
While institutional design at the local level cannot be entirely divorced from the larger political context, decision-making has been more effective and no parallel power-structures emerged along ethnic lines.
# Consequently, Brcko has been and probably will be a model for institutional design in other regions and at different levels of governance in BiH.
# Mostar, on the other hand, portrayed the weaknesses of the immediate post-war peace throughout BiH: the combination of weak power-sharing with decentralisation along ethnic lines was taken to its logical conclusion in Mostar.
# The result was the failure either to create a functional city or to reduce fears of ethnic domination.
