How can international and local actors facilitate the sustainable return of refugees and internally displaced persons (IDPs) to societies that have experienced violent inter-group conflict? What steps can be taken to renew coexistence and rebuild trust in areas of return? This article published in the International Journal of Transitional Justice explores initiatives designed to repair social relationships and provide for durable return in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). It finds that projects designed to promote livelihoods, community development and coexistence concurrently in BiH have been successful in rebuilding trust and facilitating return. In particular, inter-group collaboration around shared goals allowed for a reframing of the ‘other’ and triggered dialogue among former ‘enemies’.
Ethnic cleansing during the 1992-1995 war in Bosnia and Herzegovina destroyed the social fabric of the country and divided the three primary ethnic groups: Bosniaks, Serbs and Croats. Forced displacement was a key instrument of ethnic cleansing. The 1995 Dayton Peace Agreement guaranteed to all refugees and IDPs the right to return to their homes of origin. Return was a tremendously difficult process, in particular minority returns – returns by refugees and IDPs to prewar homes in which they formed part of a minority group. Minority returns were vehemently resisted by political actors who benefited from mono-ethnic communities and by ‘ordinary’ Bosnians who no longer trusted or welcomed the ‘other’. The paper argues that persistent division between groups and the lack of employment and income generation opportunities are the two key factors hindering sustainable return.
Seeking to address these issues, the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) adopted a pilot programme in BiH called ‘Imagine Coexistence’. It was comprised of joint activities (economic, social and psychosocial) involving members of the three ethnic groups. Many of the activities involved an income-generation and community development component, which also helped to address the dire economic situation. A few other donor agencies, primarily USAID and the UNDP, and a number of NGOs also adopted similarly designed projects, providing innovative examples of how coexistence and social repair can be mainstreamed into socioeconomic projects and the return process.
The paper finds that such integrated initiatives did contribute to an increase in levels of inter-group trust in target communities in BiH. They provided the space for dialogue that eventually extended beyond the immediate tasks at hand to more general discussions. Dialogue helped to break down stereotypes and build tolerance and empathy in shared suffering. Despite the benefits of such initiatives, international and local actors have not given them the attention necessary to ensure that a coherent, coordinated and long-term approach could be adopted in divided communities throughout BiH. This shortfall is emblematic of international efforts in general. Actors intervening in the aftermath of conflict rarely seek to address the problem of devastated relationships. Key recommendations include:
- When designing and implementing initiatives to promote sustainable return, development and peacebuilding, attention should be paid at all stages to how the repair of inter-group relationships can simultaneously be addressed. Collaboration around shared needs has been particularly effective.
- Strategies and efforts for involving local authorities and political leaders in such initiatives need to be developed. This would have the potential to expand the impact of a project beyond the direct community participants and to create safe political space for coexistence activities.
- Greater interagency coordination is necessary for efficient, comprehensive and long-term programming designed to promote return, livelihoods and social renewal. UNHCR should seek to institutionalise relationships with development organisations and to partner with the private sector and international and local actors in the field of reconciliation.
