ÅSA DALBERG
UMEÅ UNIVERSITY PEACE- AND CONFLICT STUDIES, 15 HP SPRING 2019
The Democratic Definition in Bosnia and Herzegovina
A THESIS ABOUT DEMOCRATIC DEFINITION:
PERSPECTIVES AND PERCEPTIONS
Abstract
The Democratic Definition in Bosnia and Herzegovina is a modest contribution to the vast research field concerning different democratic conceptualisations. With the presupposition that the term ‘democracy’ is defined differently across populations as a result of the specific environments existing in each country, this paper aims to identify whether the political system of socialistic Yugoslavia influenced its citizens and their democratic conceptualisation.
Through ten interviews conducted in Bosnia and Herzegovina during the spring of 2019, respondents with the first-hand experience from Yugoslavia and the peace-bringing Dayton Agreement gave their perspective of democracy. By the strength of qualitative method and the thoughts and opinions of the interviewees, the thesis is able to present an insight into how the aforementioned events have affected their democratic definition. An unexpected dimension in the matter of democratic conceptualisation was observable through this small minor field study when the descriptions were not only articulated through a political or scholarly perspective, but also defined merely through personal perception.
A sincere thanks to Nermina Voloder, my contact person in Bosnia and Herzegovina whose invaluable help made it possible to bring my ideas to reality.
Table of contents
Abstract ...
1. Introduction: Democratic Dilemmas ... 1
1.1. Purpose and research questions ... 2
1.2. Limitations ... 3
1.3. Disposition ... 3
2. Earlier research ... 4
3. Theory of Systems Analysis ... 5
3.1. Criticism ... 7
3.2. Operationalisation ... 8
4. Method ... 10
4.1. Research design ... 10
4.2. Configuration of questionnaire ... 11
4.3. Selection of interviewees ... 11
4.4. Evaluative approach to the collected data ... 12
4.5. From categorized data to the written word ... 13
4.6. Reliability, validity and the effects of an interpreter ... 14
4.7. Critical evaluation of key sources ... 15
5. Background ... 16
5.1. The environment of Yugoslavia ... 16
5.2. The environment of Bosnia and Herzegovina ... 17
6. Democracy – as a matter of minimalist and maximalist perspectives ... 19
6.1. The minimalist conceptualisation of democracy ... 20
6.1.1. Minimalist results of the questionnaire ... 20
6.1.2. Support within the minimalist group ... 22
6.2. The maximalist conceptualisation of democracy ... 23
6.2.1. Maximalist results of the questionnaire ... 24
6.2.2. Support within the maximalist group ... 26
6.3. The democratic narrative in detail ... 28
6.4. Differences beyond opinions ... 30
7. Democracy – as a matter of perceptions ... 32
8. Discussion and conclusion ... 35
Bibliography ... 37 Appendix 1 ...
Appendix 2 ...
1
1. Introduction: Democratic Dilemmas
Democracy, as a political system, is considered to be the uttermost important foundation in a modern state where the fundamental freedom of citizens is respected, promoted and fulfilled.
Democracy, posed as a universal ideal on how a state should be governed, is frequently stressed in world politics and every year billions of dollars are invested to endorse global democratic development (United Nations, 2018). But despite the trust that is put to its function, there are some democratic dilemmas to acknowledge.
First of all, the term democracy itself has been in the field of research for many years, and when Jean-Paul Gagnon attempted to find common denominators, he had encountered over 40 conceptualisations of democracy by the end of his research (Rapeli 2013: 79). Since it does not exist a universal democratic model that everyone can agree on, one cannot say a right set of beliefs exist either (Kuklinski and Quirk 2002: 285). While Western countries tend to associate the word with the ‘idealist’ conceptualisation of democracy, which stems from classical liberal theory, this cannot be applied worldwide (Norris, 1999). Research conducted in Africa, Europe and Latin America proved a significant difference in how citizens interpreted the term
‘democracy’. The same study also showed that the conceptualisations itself were of importance in regard to how the citizens evaluated the regime’s democratic performance (Baviskar and T.
Malone, 2004). Level of education and what political system the individual lives in has been suggested as plausible factors when attempting to explain why individuals define the term differently (Baviskar and T. Malone 2004: 13)(Fuchs, 1999).
Second, when a country is undergoing a democratisation process with the aid of international actors, attention has to be paid to the existing circumstances within the country, although the local perspective is rarely acknowledged by neither practitioners nor researchers (Jarstad 2016:
25). This issue is enhanced further when one takes into account that there are various ways to
view governance and democracy. The theory selected in favour for this thesis, the theory of
systems analysis, suggests that the political system and the environment in which the citizen
lives, and has lived, has an influence on what the citizen expect from its regime and how it
evaluates its performance. With this presupposition, the thesis will attempt to provide further
knowledge on what impact a former socialistic country has had on its citizens and how the
process of democratisation has affected the individual’s democratic definition.
2
In south-eastern Europe, close to the Adriatic Sea, the mountainous country of Bosnia and Herzegovina (from now on abbreviated BiH) is located. This small nation on the Balkans has in the past hundred years witnessed the birth of Yugoslavia, the rise of a socialistic one-party state unified by a common identity before the fall which resulted in a t hree-year-long violent conflict tarnished by destructive nationalism, genocide, displaced refugees and a bitter aftermath. The following peacebuilding and its peace-agreement came to be fundamental steppingstones when bringing the war-torn nation to democracy. In modern times the land mines from the war are still scattered across the country that is now divided into two entities between three constituent groups. Since democratisation is seen as an essential step in peace- building operations (Jarstad 2016: 1, 23/101), one should pose the question of how the democratic conceptualisation is articulated by those affected by the aforementioned operations.
The case study of BiH includes both of the acknowledged democratic dilemmas: a regime that first enforced socialistic governing instead of liberal democracy and the democratisation process introduced by foreign parties as an instrument of conflict resolution. These two aspects together pose an interesting setting for democratic development. This study is specifically dedicated to the individuals that have lived under these circumstances and the democratic perspectives that have been shaped by these events.
1.1. Purpose and research questions
The purpose of this thesis is to provide an insight into how individuals that grew up in Yugoslavia and now lives in the modern state of Bosnia and Herzegovina defines democracy and what their expectations of democracy are. In regard to the different political history the country offers in comparison to the West, the aim is to distinguish whether former socialistic Yugoslavia and the implementation of the Dayton Agreement post-conflict have influenced the citizens’ democratic definition.
1. According to the theory of systems analysis, it is the environment that shapes the political attitude of the citizenry. What is the democratic narrative within a group that first experienced socialist Yugoslavia, later a civil war and now lives in a state
founded on a peace-agreement which advocates for and should ensure ‘democracy’?
2. Do the interviewees describe another type of democracy than what is spoken about in the West?
3. What has influenced the democratic narrative in Bosnia and Herzegovina?
3
1.2. Limitations
Certain limitations were done in the process of this thesis - limitations that were both necessary and strategic. Due to the page limit of a bachelor’s thesis and this being the work of one authoress some aspects could not be covered, with the advantage of ensuring the quality of what has been included but the disadvantage of analytical and factual loss. One aspect affected is related to the multiple levels of decision-making in BiH, where the most significant structures of the government are covered whilst the cantonal and municipal levels have been excluded from the analysis. Due to the decentralisation of legislative power and decision-making in the country, especially in the Federation, one can expect local differences which are not accounted for in this paper. There was also an age limitation done, where no one under the age of 51 was interviewed since the individuals were required to possess experience from Yugoslavia first hand. The reader is therefore asked to note that this paper, unfortunately, lacks the perspective of younger individuals.
Furthermore, despite reoccurring references to the Dayton Agreement, no comprehensive information about its content is provided. This paper does not offer any further descriptions of the agreement, nor does it any attempts to evaluate the consequences of it. The focus is instead set upon the opinions from those affected by the agreement and to understand how the international community might have had an impact on the citizens’ democratic definition.
1.3. Disposition
This final paragraph of the introductive chapter is by followed by an oversight of earlier research and an explanation of how previous findings in the field has influenced this paper.
Fundamental ideas of and noted criticism toward the theory of systems analysis are elaborated on afterwards. The theoretical application of the case study is described in the operationalisations section, a discussion which continues in the methods section where further argument and thought behind the selection of interviewees, reasoning behind the questionnaire, management of raw data and evaluative approach is found.
A background section of three pages follows, which should provide the reader with necessary
information about the two political systems and their environments. The results are divided into
two different chapters, where the first reveals the answers to the questionnaire and the different
democratic conceptualisations. The second chapter shed light on similarities found among the
interviewees. Theoretical analysis and evaluation are intertwined throughout these two
chapters. Finally, the paper ends with a discussion and a small conclusion of the work The
Democratic Definition in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
4
2. Earlier research
Previous research conducted in the field has shown a significant difference between political culture and democratic conceptualisations, as stated in the introduction (Fuchs 1999: 128). With some further knowledge about the matter, the reader has the chance to get familiar with the subject in question and can understand the thoughts behind the thesis more easily. Hence, a few of the studies will be mentioned in this paragraph to demonstrate the versatility of the individual’s perception and expectations of the term democracy. Baviskar and T. Malone (2004) measured the expectations of democracy by means and ends in a few chosen countries in Latin America, by means including fair elections and universal suffrage whilst ends emphasised economic equality and social services. The authors did not only find a remarkable difference between Argentina, Brazil, Chile and Guatemala but also a connection between their conceptualisations and their support for democracy. Baviskar and Malone discussed their results related to what degree of education the individual had and his/her gender.
Fuchs (1999) studied the unification of Germany, where a contrast in democratic attitude between East and West Germany was found. The eastern Germans identified a welfare-oriented democracy, whilst the western Germans viewed democracy from a (social) liberal perspective.
Thus, a majority of the population in East Germany considered that the new governmental institution failed in its democratic duties while West Germany found the government to fulfil them. In conclusion, Fuchs related these differences to the different political systems the two populations had lived under and been influenced by. Mishler (1991) also wrote about the political challenges’ former communist nations met as new democracies. In comparison to established democratic societies, the citizenry is not aware of what other alternatives are available except their own political system.
The first two studies by Baviskar and T. Malone (2004) and Fuchs (1999) used the definitions
of minimal and maximal democracy in their work, which will be used as a framework in this
thesis as well. Further explanation about this choice is included in the methods section. The last
two examples constituted by Mishler (1991) and Fuchs (1999) were both executed shortly after
the change from communism to democracy. Both acknowledged how support for the regime
often is a subtle process which occurs through childhood socialization and therefore is not
always a conscious choice. This thesis is founded on those premises as well. On the other hand,
this paper does not only offer an insight into what political attitudes remain almost thirty years
after the fall of Yugoslavia but also includes the political system of socialism into the research
field.
5
3. Theory of Systems Analysis
We now know that democratic conceptualisations vary across populations and that these different conceptualisations have an impact on how individuals express their democratic support. In the case study of Bosnia and Herzegovina, the goal of the thesis is to examine whether Yugoslavia left a political heritage to its citizens in terms of how they articulate their democratic support is, and if so, what the political heritage is. As the purpose of the thesis is to examine whether this has occurred or not, it is necessary to choose a theory which emphasises the impact of political systems and how its societal structures affect the individual in-depth. As with new democracies and post-conflict countries, the previous happenings affect the lives, thoughts and values of the population. Since the process of democratization in BiH was used as a strategy to enable peace by the implementation of external actors (Gavric et al. 2013: 16-17), it is an interesting case study in terms of democratic conceptualisations.
The authoress considers the theory of systems analysis to be useful for this thesis due to its ability to view the political system as a whole, whilst distinguishing different elements in society from each other and expose the impact they have on each other. With this theory, one can understand how the citizens in society are affected by the political environment they grew up in and how former norms and values still might shape the demands and expectations on a regime, although the environment and the outputs in it have changed.
The theory of systems analysis was developed by David Easton as a reaction towards the belief that every nation across the world must have its own prescript theory, which explains their specific governance accordingly. Easton, in comparison, argues in Analysis of Political Systems (1957) that one theory only would be able to provide scholars with the necessary information to analyse political systems independently. The theory views political systems holistically, which means that every part can be evaluated separately, but always with consideration to the whole since interrelated activities between the different units (e.g. interest groups, political parties, elections and government) occur throughout the system.
A political system exists and operates within an environment. Other social systems also exist
within the environment such as economic, demographic and cultural systems, whereas Easton
argues that the cultural system is of specific importance to the political system since it
emphasises its values and priorities. The political system can be distinguished from the other
social systems by viewing actions directly related to the decision-making as a part, whilst
activities that do not must be excluded and instead belong to the environmental sphere. The
environment provides specific settings that have an impact on the political and the social
6
systems and these systems will, in turn, react upon the stress stemming from events in the environment.
Fig. 1: The political system
Another distinguishable trait for a political system is the belief that its machinery of inputs and outputs have a significant and authoritative role in society. The inputs could e.g. be when the citizens, interest groups and political parties articulate demands or support the state. A large amount of the events in a system is a consequence of the impact of different units, which in turn might have been affected by the environment. The outputs are, simply explained, the outcome of the inputs and how the system (often the structure of institutions) transforms demands and support to implement public policy.
Demands and support are vital parts that contribute to the dynamic character of a political
system. Demands rise when there is something unsatisfactory in the society that should be
managed on a higher level in the system. Many parts of the society can, and is so most often,
considered to be unsatisfactory to at least a few citizens. This is, of course, not a guarantee that
their demands will be relevant to the political agenda. Demands can be articulated within the
environment or within the political system. To separate the two of them, they are
advantageously being labelled ‘external’ and ‘internal’ demands. The social systems mentioned
in the previous paragraph constitute a framework that will shape what demands articulated by
the units. In terms of support, Easton identified two types. The first one is the support of goals,
interests and actions of another person, e.g. a politician or the decision of the court and it is
manifested through overt action. The second type of support is internal to its kind, it is the
7
‘supportive state of mind’ and is recognised by immanent attitudes infused with loyalty towards a party, a political system or to a country. In comparison to the previous form of support, there is no overt action involved but instead how the individual is connected to these feelings. The aspect of the supportive state of mind is vital when one examines the support of a political system. If the citizenry is attached to the system or/and its ideals, they are naturally less likely to participate in actions that aim to undermine or overthrow established institutions. According to Easton, support is directed to three domains: the community, the regime and the government.
The mechanisms of support could stem either from the outputs or through politicisation. There is great utility in terms of support for the government if its outputs meet the demands from the citizenry. Demands and inputs are met through political decisions such as legislation and public policy. As was mentioned earlier, not every individual has the opportunity to have their demands met or even to be relevant to the political community. This occurrence is normally not an issue within a system since it should possess a reserve of support, meaning that although some outputs might upset some individuals, they will still have trust in the regime if they are of the belief that previous actions and decisions previously has been fair. Again, distrust in the government does not automatically imply distrust in the regime or the political community; but if the demands are repeatedly not met accordingly in the outputs, the citizenry could eventually turn against the regime. Politicization is the mechanism that refers to the process when individuals are taught the values of the society and appropriate what demands are considered to be relevant in the political system. Easton argues that it is fundamental that the members of the system have a basic set of expectations to the regime in order to legitimate its authority.
3.1. Criticism
The theory of systems analysis developed by David Easton has been criticised for being a copy of the classic economic model written by Adam Smith, where the similarities between the theories are allegedly too many and too detailed to be merely a coincidence – which Easton himself argues. Due to these similarities, the critique is that a theory, which stems from economics, cannot adequately be applied to political science and social reality since the prerequisites are not the same. This critique is strengthened by the notion that events (e.g.
presupposed behaviour and the self-regulation process) in the theory of systems analysis which
comes across as ambiguous or non-explanatory, makes sense in an economic context. This
critique also touches upon the topic that the theory is not as universally applicable as first stated,
but instead depends upon certain essential elements where individuals strive towards value-
maximization (political actors gain support from the outputs). Such norms are not to be found
8
everywhere in the world. The theory is said to be limited to societies where this behaviour exists, where western democracies tend to accommodate a culture of that kind. Communication channels and institutions are also required, which can keep the feedback-loop intact and transfer information between output and input (Sorzano, 1975).
A few of these criticised aspects are relevant to the chosen case study. Although the Constitution assures freedom of speech, BiH lacks proper communication channels since politicians are said to put pressure on journalists and media outlets most often have connections with political parties (Freedom House, no date). The value-maximizing behaviour is also a disclaimer since it can be contested whether it has ever been present. In Yugoslavia, the ordinary citizen was kept away from the effective decision-making, and the socialist party could not be averted (Dyker and Vejvoda 1996: 17). In modern days, on the other hand, it would be necessary for the political actors to care about the voters to gain their support and encourage value- maximizing behaviour. This is unfortunately not the case, as the system is embedded by corruption and fails to deliver election pledges whilst the level of trust toward politicians is alarmingly low (Balkan Insight, 2018).
Despite the criticism toward the theory of systems analysis and the discrepancies between the theory and BiH as a case study, the authoress still considers it to be useful for this thesis.
Although its holistic view of the society does not correspond with the situation of the country, the postulated ideas of the impact of the environment and the perspective on support speaks in favour of this paper. These were the aspects that the authoress had in mind in particular when searching for an appropriate theory. The theory intertwines the citizenry with its political system and offers a plausible explanation as to the occurrence of different democratic conceptualisations.
3.2. Operationalisation
In this thesis, the theory of systems analysis is applied over the case study. To discover whether
Yugoslavia and its political system has shaped the democratic narrative of the citizens’ that
grew up in its environment, the concepts of environment, demands and support are used as tools
to analyse how they talk and think about the term ‘democracy’. As mentioned in the paragraph
of earlier research, there are examples of populations that have inherited their political culture
from previous political systems. By being attentive to what impact political systems has on its
citizens, this paper aims to understand this phenomenon further on a more profound and
individual plane by enabling personal perspectives to be heard.
9
First, the term environment is operationalised by distinguishing two different settings; the former socialist system of Yugoslavia with its socialistic economy, and then the democratic system of BiH with its market economy. The environment of socialist Yugoslavia was based upon principles that valued work-related rights (the right to have a job, annual leave, pensions), welfare and the belief of profit of the production was to be shared between the workers (Rogel:
13-15). The environment of modern BiH does in comparison emphasise equality between the three Constituent peoples and complex federalism is meant to assure that the groups have the same opportunity to affect politics, in contrary to Yugoslavia where the goal instead was to unite the country under one leader. The different prerequisites of the two environments are further explained in the “Background” section.
Demands are, as previously stated, a part of the inputs and set the standard of what the citizens and other interest groups expect from the state. Since the units are likely to be under the influence of the environment, the demands often reflect values and norms that exist within the environment which in turn are set by the social systems. The demands of the Yugoslavian environment would therefore likely reflect the value of worker’s rights, shared means of production and economic equality while the modern environment instead should emphasise the opportunity to engage in politics. As explained, Easton emphasizes the importance of support which can be internal and overt to its kind. The presupposition would be that the internal support was shaped through politicization in Yugoslavia and the political values that were advocated for then would still be inherent in individuals that lived under the regime. Of course, it is important to note that BiH is not recognized as a functioning democracy and is rated as a “hybrid regime” in The Economist (2018). Therefore, one can assume that the support probably not have been influenced positively by the current state, and instead might have reinforced the preference for the socialistic system.
In line with the theory of system analysis, the expected results would be that the interviewees
indeed have a different democratic narrative due to their exposure to the socialistic environment
in Yugoslavia. Their demands would be of the maximal kind, demanding access to well-
developed welfare, economic equality and that the means of production are to be shared. Thus,
their democratic conceptualisation would perhaps be influenced by this. There might also be
scepticism towards a multi-party system, or that firmer leadership will be advocated. Also, as
with other former communistic countries, they did not only transform their political system –
but also their economic structure, which is essential to take in consideration.
10
4. Method
4.1. Research design
Since the goal of the thesis was to achieve a resourceful insight in how the former citizen of Yugoslavia orientates around the term ‘democracy’ the aim was to gather in-depth material, thus excluding any large-scale quantitative projects that could lead to a general conclusion applicable to the whole population. Also; when one is focused upon personal contexts and past experiences of an individual, quantitative methods usually fall short (Creswell 2013: 47-48).
Since the data was about to be gathered alone by the authoress, the choice of method came with quite natural limitations. By excluding the demands of large-scale research, the time and energy could instead be concentrated around the ten interviews, assuring that the work would keep a satisfying level of quality. A further strength of semi-structured interviews is that it allows both structure and flexibility. The structure enables the empirical material to be cohesive where the questions have been thought through and decided beforehand whilst flexibility is given to the interviewee to speak his or her mind freely within the subject (Nilsson, 2014). Furthermore, this study was partly funded by a Minor Field Study grant from SIDA, and its means made it possible to conduct the interviews face to face with the interviewees in BiH.
As the thesis is founded on two presupposed pillars; namely the presupposition that the environment has a notable impact on its citizens and that the many conceptualisations of
‘democracy’ can be connected to this assumption. Furthermore, as the purpose of the thesis is
to look at this presupposition from a Bosnian context, BiH as a case study offer a unique setting
in comparison to other countries. First of all, the Yugoslavian heritage is neither liberal nor
communistic but consisted instead of socialism constructed by president Tito. The nation
further stood out as an example since the regime under Tito had good support, despite not being
democratically elected. In comparison to other dictatorships, it is not as obvious whether the
socialistic system would be declined in favour of a democratic one (Uvalić 2018: 42). The case
of BiH does also include the war of 1992 and 1995, an event that must be seen upon as
something highly disruptive in the political system (as in the surrounding systems). This event
might have had an impact on how individuals view democracy, and how the events that
occurred in the ’90s has shaped their political views in terms of demands, support and the role
of institutions. Since the international community contributed to the peacebuilding efforts in no
small degree, one should also take into account that their intervention might have affected the
political view on governance.
11
4.2. Configuration of questionnaire
The questionnaire can be seen in appendix one and was written beforehand. When writing the questionnaire, the key concepts from the theory of systems analysis which were discussed in the Operationalizations section, were used as reference points and implied what aspects had to be taken in consideration to the questions. The first section covered the term ‘democracy’ from multiple angles; the interviewees were asked first to describe what the term meant for them, and the word was later on contextualised by putting the term in relation to the environments of Yugoslavia, modern BiH and other countries. Information concernings demands were gathered when touching upon democratic rights and what is most important when running a country.
These questions altogether came to frame the participants’ view on ‘democracy’ quite well, and the multi-angled approach managed to extract information that could reveal whether citizens who grew up and lived in Yugoslavia still favoured the socialism system due to the internal support as the theory of systems analysis suggests. A question which explicitly addressed the war and the international peace-building missions were also included.
The second section of the questionnaire consists of several questions in regard to support in the political system, another essential key concept from the theory. This section was initially meant to provide enough information for a more extensive analysis of support toward institutions to be conducted. Due to page restrictions, this analysis had to be excluded from the final paper and the many questions about different institutions might therefore come across as unnecessary numerous. Despite the second section not being used as intended, many valuable inputs concerning specific support towards the institutional structure today and the institutional structure then would have a notable impact on the results.
The questionnaire was reviewed and consulted by the Minor Field Study contact person Nermina Voloder, which was very helpful in the aspect of considering what terminology to use and how to ask the questions in a way that would be understood by the participants.
4.3. Selection of interviewees
The interviewees were chosen strategically; individuals from all three constituent groups in BiH
were to be included to reflect the demographic composition of the country. Therefore, the group
of interview participants consisted of three Bosniacs, three Croats, three Serbs and one person
who identified as Yugoslavian. Since this thesis emphasises the citizens’ recognition of the
term ‘democracy’, it is inevitably the citizen and his or her thoughts, opinions and values that
are of interest. Thus, the only one with the intrinsic knowledge that is required for this paper is
possessed by individuals with experience from Yugoslavia. Due to the aspect of time, certain
12
age limitations were necessary and the target group had to be middle age or late middle-age individuals. The advantage with this target group is that they would possess the first-hand experience from the two political environments (instead of opinions based on information from history books) since they have lived under the influence of the two environments directly. The result from excluding younger individuals is, of course, that the perspective of the youth is not accounted for. The interviewees had to have basic knowledge about the political system but not to the degree where they knew more than the average citizen; which is why scholars, journalists, politicians and officials were ruled out due to the risk of bias or overqualification. In conclusion, the interview participants were between 51-68 years of age since they possessed the requested knowledge of former Yugoslavia, the war and the country post-conflict. The interviewees were either friends’ parents or acquaintances to my contact person Nermina Voloder. The interview participants did not know each other.
The respondents have been anonymised, due to the respect for their privacy and GDPR.
4.4. Evaluative approach to the collected data
In order to transform the data into empiric material, the audio recordings were transcribed a day or two after the interview had taken place. Since it was the thoughts and opinions that were of interest, the transcriptions only reproduced what was said. Only notable non-verbal communication was included in the transcripts, such as apparent mood-changes (e.g. tears, laughter) (R. Gibbs 2007: 13-15). After the transcripts had been reviewed and it could be assured that they correctly reproduced what had been said, a conclusion of each interview of 2- 4 pages where the respondent’s answers on the questions were put together. Quotes were often included to not lose the context of the reply. A conclusion of this kind was necessary to write, since some transcripts were up to seventeen pages long, involved personal anecdotes and family stories which were not about to be included in the thesis. The transcripts were, of course, reviewed regularly throughout the writing process to assure that statements were correct.
To prevent the coding process from becoming arbitrary when the interviewees described their perspective of democracy, their statements were categorized according to the minimalist and maximalist definitions of ‘democracy’. Baviskar and Malone (2004: 4) describes in their paper what distinction can be made between them. The ‘minimalist’ definition emphasises free and fair elections and guaranteed civil liberties. The ‘maximalist’ definition of democracy highlights the importance of economic equality, social services and welfare. Ekman et al (2014:
20) distinguishes the two types of democratic conceptualisations by writing how the maximalist
13
definition includes the whole apparatus of the society whilst the minimalist definition is limited to the political arena only and the election process.
This categorisation was in favour of the two environments in question, where the minimalist definition correlates with Western liberal democracy implemented in BiH and the maximalist description corresponds with the socialistic system of Yugoslavia. These categories made it easier to compare the answers between the interviewees, which in turn made it possible to achieve a structure within the gathered data. This enabled that both reoccurring opinions and topics could be as easily spotted as those themes that weren’t frequently expressed (Bryman 578-581). The authoress found that these two categories were sufficient to code the material.
Within the maximalist category, four sub-themes were found; welfare, labour rights and equality. Codes that could be considered belonging to the minimalist category was gathered under the sub-theme “civil rights”. Concerning the minimalist category, two sub-themes were found; codes related to suffrage and codes related to political and civil rights.
4.5. From categorized data to the written word
When the categorized data were about to be transformed into the final paper, there was one goal that was considered to be of great importance – every perspective should be included. If only a slight minority of the interviewees would express a certain opinion, it was not considered to be any less worthy than statements which correlated with the majority. This is in line with the aspect of inclusivity (Brinkmann 2013:114), but also means that findings that were common among the interview participants were compressed in order to give room to ‘unique’ findings.
It is noted in the paragraph what opinions speaks for the majority and what speaks for the
minority in the participant group. Brinkmann (2013:113) encourages to include quotations from
the interviews in the text to increase the study’s authenticity, which has been done where
appropriate. Statements that were considered to be ‘on point’ and vividly portray what had been
said was chosen in this procedure. When the empirical section had been written, the transcripts
were revised one last time to ensure correct contexts and statements.
14
4.6. Reliability, validity and the effects of an interpreter
The selection of interviewees could be described as a mix between ‘convenience sampling’ and
‘purposive sampling’. In the first strategy, the interviewees are selected upon availability. This was the procedure in the minor field study, and the data collection relied on what persons my contact person knew beforehand. Convenience sampling is often criticized since it does not take
“the goal of the study and the criterion of information richness into account” (Schreier 2018:
116). However, this was not entirely the procedure in the minor field study. In purposive sampling, the knowledge of the interviewees is taken into account upon selection, which indeed was the case in the data collection (Schreier 2018: 115). It was noted beforehand that they should have experience of Yugoslavia, the war and the country post-conflict and the three constituent people were all represented among the nine participants, plus the one person who identified as Yugoslavian.
Two kinds of interpreters were used in the interviews; a student who did not know the interviewees beforehand assisted with the Croatian participants, while the Serb and Bosniac participants either had their sons, daughters or my contact person assisting with the translation.
Two respondents spoke sufficient English to manage the interview without the help of an interpreter. General flaws with the use of an interpreter the risk of the interpreter to alter what is being said or that their own views coloured the translation. With the use of two different interpreter types, it decreases the reliability since the relationship between the interviewees and interpreters were not the same throughout the interview process. This did indeed seem to have an impact on the quality of the interviews. Interviews conducted with a relative or acquaintance as an interpreter were at least thirty minutes or longer, since the interviewees shared many details of their personal past and present and expressed their opinions in a way which they themselves would call “extreme”. In comparison, the interviews with the student were mainly limited to answer the questions without further elaboration. Due to this, it is reasonable to believe what is was reassuring for the interviewees to have someone they knew besides them when talking about their view of politics. Looking back at the interview procedure, this has caused a weakness in regards to reliability.
Another flaw that is very apparent when looking back at the process, is that the translation sheet
should have been translated beforehand. Instead, each of the interpreters would translate the
questions themselves, which of course might have a negative impact on the reliability as well.
15
4.7. Critical evaluation of key sources
Publications from both scholars and organisations were used in this thesis. Critical Citizens:
Global Support for Democratic Government (1999) written by Norris (ed.) and several other international scholars and the article What Democracy Means to Citizens – and Why it Matters (2004) by Baviskar and T. Malone published in European Review of Latin American and Caribbean Studies were the works concerning research about the term ‘democracy’. Both of them, in turn, used the same references. This could indicate a lack of bibliographical diversity and that other alternative sources has not been taken into account.
Helsinki Committee for Human Rights in Serbia is the publisher of Yugoslavia From a Historical Perspective (2017) which had the aim of describing key historical processes in Yugoslavia and its dissolution. The book also consists of a collection of papers authored by scholars and the chapter used in this thesis was written by professor Igor Duda. The Rise and Fall of Market Socialism in Yugoslavia (2018) was written by another professor, Milica Uvalic and published through Dialogue of Civilizations Research Institute. Emeritus professor and U.S. specialist in Yugoslavia, Carole Rogel brought up important socio-economic structures in and her book The Breakup of Yugoslavia and the War in Bosnia (1998). Yugoslavia and After:
A Study in Fragmentation, Despair and Rebirth (1996) by Dyker and Vejvoda is a collaboration between the Science Policy Research Unit and the Sussex European Research Institute. All these references were chosen due to their high relevance to the purpose of the thesis, and they altogether managed to cover the essential elements in the environment of Yugoslavia.
For information about the modern environment of BiH, journals and works published through organisations were to a large extent used. The Economist, Freedom House and World Bank Group are among the more reputed. The less well-known website Balkan Insight is used by policy-makers, corporate management and academic researchers, and the information provided in the article Bosnia Elections 2018: Profile was often confirmed in the interviews of the study.
The Political System of Bosnia and Herzegovina (2013) written by Gavric (ed), Banović and Barreiro (2013) had the aim to cover all the institutional essentials and the historical events that have had an impact on the political structure in BiH, and their publication was to great help for this thesis.
As seen, works of scholars were to a large extent used. Regarding the current situation in the
BiH, the writings of journals and organisations contained information more up-to-date and were
therefore chosen instead.
16
5. Background
5.1. The environment of Yugoslavia
After Yugoslavia’s communist party were expulsed from Cominform (Communist Information Bureau) in 1948, president Tito would lead the country in his own socialistic manner. The socialistic market economy shifted the ownership and maintenance of the means of production to worker’s councils, which meant that neither the asset owners nor the state were in charge. In the workers’ self-management model profits were shared between the workers, although the board was still selected by the communist party. The separation from Cominform and the nonalignment in the international community attracted financial support from the West in the 1950s. In the same decade the citizens of Yugoslavia were living relatively well (compared to other countries in Eastern Europe) and had access to consumer goods, trade with Western countries, open borders and sufficient harmony between the ethnic groups (Rogel 1998: 13-15).
Constitutional reforms in the 1960s sought to liberalise the economic system and provide the six republics with more influence over economic planning. Advocates also spoke in favour of intellectual freedom and political autonomy. Politics became decentralised, which meant that the leaders of the communistic parties in the republics were sawed upon as a representative for their region. When discord occurred between the republics, president Tito would act as a mediator (Rogel 1998: 15). The everyday life of the citizens would drastically improve in the second half of the century. The former agrarian society transformed through modernisation tactics, industrialisation, electrification and urbanisation. Living conditions took a turn for the better when investments on housing were made; washing machines, vacuum cleaners and fridges became available to the public and the car came to be connected with common living standards. Workers employed by enterprises and institutions would have their accommodation provided for by the socially-owned sector (Duda 2017: 392-402).
Mentalities that had prevailed during a long period of time changed. The individual was not
limited to his or her circle of relationships, but the community now came to include the
collective. When the ethnic identity quelled in favour of the new Yugoslavian belonging, old
traditions were adapted into new ones, and new collective public events were offered instead
of the old traditions (ibid: 392). The health of the citizens improved when institutions providing
health care increased. Health insurance and vaccination became mandatory, and those with
employment were covered by occupational medicine and safety systems. Pensions and elderly
care would provide dignified living in the last period of life (ibid: 397-398).
17
But the totalitarian regime enforced more than welfare development and free education. Those who argued against or criticised Tito and the party were condemned as political prisoners, Stalin supporters or people that were considered to push for nationalism alike. Unwanted literature was banned and burned, anti-communist texts were never translated, and art exhibitions were censored. Mandatory classes in Marxism and socialism self-management were compulsory in all schools and university faculties (Dyker and Vejvoda 1996: 13-14). The situation in the country worsened after president Tito’s death in 1980 and Yugoslavia underwent an economic crisis which resulted in strikes and demonstrations. At the end of 1980, several changes took place in order to meet these challenges. In 1989 the social discontent had pushed for changes within the political arena and other parties were now allowed, which came to intensify the already tense situation between regions and ethnic groups. Whilst Croatian and Slovenian nationalism favoured decentralisation and more influence over their economic resources, Serbian nationalism spoke against it. The socialist market economy was abandoned, and a capitalist economic system was to be implemented instead. When these actions did not have the desired effects, the instabilities in the 1980s would increase even more through the following decade (Uvalić 2018: 39-47). BiH parted with Yugoslavia 1992.
5.2. The environment of Bosnia and Herzegovina
When the conflict erupted in 1992, it was the start of a war that would last three years and involved genocide, massacres and displaced refugees. The conflict came to an end in 1995 when the Dayton Agreement was signed, and the principles written in the peace-agreement came to stipulate the foundation of the political system in BiH that is still present to this day. The agreement was an instrument used by the international community, intended for conflict resolution and to establish peace between warring parties. The result was a complex political system with a constitution defining the citizenry through ethnicity where Bosniacs, Croats and Serbs are acknowledged as constituent peoples. While the Constituent people have the right to organise themselves in politics and the power is shared between the three groups, individuals who do not belong to any of the aforementioned groups lack the same rights. External parties were for a long time present in the country through the Office of the High Representative, an observing governing body with the purpose to coordinate the civil aspects of the agreement.
(Gavric et al: 15-20).
The country was in the Dayton Agreement divided into two entities and their borders are
according to ethnic lines; Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina (Bosniacs and Croats) and
Republika Srpska (Serbs). The seat of the presidency is divided between three representatives
18
from each of the Constituent groups, elected by the groups themselves and serve as the head of the country. The presidents are in office for four years, and every eighth month the position of the Chairman is rotating. The presidency is expected to take decisions in consensus (Gavric et al. 2013: 30-34). Multiple layers characterise the political structure in BiH. The political power is divided first between entities and even further in the Federation between cantons. The national political level manages the international affairs of BiH and other tasks as decentralised downwards in the political structure (ibid: 35). The Parliamentary Assembly has two chambers;
The House of Representatives and the House of Peoples. The Parliamentary Assembly is responsible for approval and execution of the state budget, constitutional amendments and legislation among other tasks. The Council of Ministers is the state-level government of BiH, which the Parliamentary Assembly manages the approval and the control of (ibid: 36-37). The judicial system is decentralised in BiH and is, as the political system, multi-layered. The Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina is the judicial instance on the state-level and its primary tasks are effective implementation of the central states´ competencies and protection of human rights and the rule of law. The court is responsible for issues that concern the nation, e.g. territorial integrity, central state economy and corruption (ibid: 44, 45).
The electoral law has, through the Dayton Agreement, introduced international democratic standards in the country such as universal suffrage, equal voting rights, direct and secret ballot during the elections which should be free, fair and of course – democratic (ibid: 63). The attempts to ensure a democratic development aside, BiH is classified as a hybrid regime in The Democratic Index with scores below 5.00 at “Functioning of government” and “Political culture” (The Economist, 2018: p.17). Many of the media outlets are controlled by political parties, and journalists can have their work interfered with by police officers when covering the news (Freedom House, no date). Trust is low towards the parties who in their manifestos speak of the improvements about to be made for the country, but at power often show a vague will to follow through their election promises (Balkan Insight, 2018).
The challenges of BiH is both economic and political. Employment rates are low and despite a
high tax-pressure a lot of the money is used as fuel in a public sector that is struggling with
consistent inefficient public spending. Reforms that are planned to take place in order to
increase the efficiency of public investments, tax system and social security are delayed due to
the political disagreements (World Bank Group 2019: 66-68). If the environment of Yugoslavia
brought materialistic modernity, enabled education to the youth and work to the citizens of the
country the modern environment seems to be recognised by all the opposites.
19
6. Democracy – as a matter of minimalist and maximalist perspectives
The empirical section of this thesis is divided into two different chapters. First, the answers to the questionnaire are presented. Different views which corresponded with the maximalist and minimalist conceptualisations did occur and the interviewees were put in groups respectively.
Due to this, the first chapter is also divided into two different sections, where the first is dedicated to the answers from the minimalist category and the second part is dedicated to responses from the maximalist category. This allows for the features of each group to be specifically accounted for whilst sub-themes and codes are put in their corresponding context.
The second chapter shifts the focus from differences to similarities. The paragraphs bring up common opinions and topics that reoccurred among all of the interviewees, seemingly not related to their definition of democracy. In this chapter, the answers to the questionnaire are also discussed more thoroughly. When the theory of systems analysis is applied an attempt is made to analyse what has affected the differences in context to the groups respectively, and the group as a whole.
In short, the result was as follows; five interviewees described the term ‘democracy' as to how it is perceived according to the minimalist definition and the other five described the term as to how it is perceived according to the maximalist definition. This was not anticipated since the authoress expected the latter definition to be in the majority due to the process of politicisation in the environment of socialist Yugoslavia. As written in the Operationalisations section, social services and welfare should dominate their view on ‘democracy' whilst political rights should not be as emphasised.
After a lot of consideration, a decision was taken to not include a descriptive table of the
interviewees. As seen in the second appendix, the respondents only agreed to share their
opinions, thoughts and statements publicly. Since full anonymity was ensured to the
participants, it did not feel appropriate to share more information than necessary. Instead, they
have been given numbers in order to ease the reading process of the empirical results.
20
6.1. The minimalist conceptualisation of democracy
This section is dedicated to the group who defined democracy in minimalist terms. The group consisted of four males and one female. The ethnical representation was two Croats, one Serb, one Bosniac and one person who identified as Yugoslavian. Mean age of respondents was 59 years. Only one of them lived in the capital of BiH, Sarajevo, whereas three lived in Travnik and one in Pale. Two participants had experience from living abroad (the United States and the United Kingdom).
Two sub-themes were distinguished within the minimalist category. Five out of five participants spoke of "suffrage" as a fundamentality in a democracy. The other sub-theme, "civil/political rights", was mentioned by three interviewees and referred to freedom of thought, freedom of speech and absence of corruption.
6.1.1. Minimalist results of the questionnaire
When the interviewees described what they associated with the term 'democracy', the answers were very short and concise. The role of the citizens is to have a right to vote and to elect who should rule the country. What role the regime had varied across the participants, but the core principle was for the regime to serve its citizens. This is done by listening to the voters, be a voice for the citizenry and for the parties to get the voters’ approval in order to keep their position in the next election. Interviewee two associated ‘respect’ with democracy; for the citizens to respect each other, the institutions and the rules of the system and for the regime to respect its citizens, the voters and the parties. The same respondent mentioned that the role of the regime was to rule as well. Interviewee five associated ‘equality’ with democracy.
The answers to the second question were a bit more divided. Two interviewees said that Yugoslavia was not democratic due to the one-party system and the non-existing opportunity to remove president Tito. The three others did also acknowledge these democratic shortcomings but spoke well about the former system in terms of inputs and outputs. Interviewee three thought that Yugoslavia was more democratic than BiH since it was possible for the citizens to influence politics on a local level when electing the politicians who should represent the region, and could speak for the needs they had in their specific area. The respondent explained that the expenses on elections were not as high as in BiH, but that the result in Yugoslavia was better in the sense that the citizens had a higher degree of influence in politics, despite being limited to a local level. Interviewee four considered Yugoslavia to be democratic under the circumstances;
meaning that regardless of the one-party system they felt free, lived good lives and were given
21
all the prerequisites to do so. The quote below is taken from the respondent number five who were of the same opinion;
“ It´s not democracy, because it was a one-party system. Because Tito and his fellows were the ones who ruled, and what they decided; it was the way it was. He was the ruler, he’d say. As for the citizens, it was very good for them. (…) Most of the people, while we had Yugoslavia here, had a good time in their life. We had some goals, you had a vision, you had a will to do something. You could plan something in advance. But now, in this democracy, as it is in the state of now… If we can call it democracy here in BiH... Here, what we have here, is a disaster. It’s terrible.”
Two persons considered modern BiH to be democratic - at least formally. Three participants considered the modern society to not be democratic due to the high levels of corruption, nepotism and criminality.
In terms of democratic rights, two interviewees mentioned that they had acquired either civil or political rights that were inaccessible in Yugoslavia; freedom of speech, freedom of thought and the right to elect and to be elected. Respondent five said that they did have, and has democratic rights but that they were/are not put to practice accordingly. Interviewee three went on the same line, that perhaps they had acquired some democratic rights since the fall of Yugoslavia but he/she respondent did not feel it. Instead, the person mentioned that the democratic right of freedom of movement was more prevalent in Yugoslavia.
When asked about whether democracy is different in other countries, two respondents answered that democracy as such could not different, but the way it is implemented is different in each individual country. These differences depend upon what circumstances is to be found within different nations, e.g. economic resources. Respondent one added that it does not exist one completely democratic country anywhere in the world. Two participants brought up maximalist elements in terms of democracy and mentioned that it is easier to be a citizen in countries where one is granted work and social benefits, whereas interviewee two further on elaborated that the Scandinavian countries are most democratic because of this. Respondent five did not answer the question.
A majority of the interviewees did not think that neither the conflict nor the peace-building
missions influenced their attitude towards governance and democracy. Interviewee one said
that the conflict did partly have an influence, but that he/she person already possessed many of
the opinions before. Respondent five said that the peace-building missions had a negative
impact on the person’s attitude since he/she agrees with neither the visions of the missions nor
22
the people implementing it. Instead, these missions are used to enable foreign influence and are not working in the interest of BiH.
Favoured traits in a leader were honesty, to be just and to have a good set of morals. Other factors that were mentioned was that the leader should have a vision in order to be able to lead others, and the person must, of course, be suitable for the position. Respondent five spoke vividly positive about a Serbian mayor, who truly served his citizens and engaged in his community. Interviewee meant that this mayor possessed the traits of a true leader.
When asked about the most important aspects when maintaining and running a country, two respondents emphasised good governance – respondent four in the means of basic understanding of economics to ensure progress whilst being democratic and fair, and respondent three in the means of the government as an employer paying proper salaries. The latter person also emphasised equality and no discrimination on religious or ethnic grounds.
Respondent five said that the most important thing when running a country was to keep security levels intact, in reference to how it was before the war. He/she also said that it was important for the state to develop itself, comparing to the fabrics and industries which existed in Yugoslavia. Interviewee two stated that it was important for one man to have authority over everyone whilst working for all three nations and for the people to respect that. Participant one noted that it was important for the state to be led by someone from the country who knew the nation and its citizens. After that, a moral and just approach should be taken in order to work with the three nations.
6.1.2. Support within the minimalist group
The knowledge about the Dayton Agreement was high among the minimalist participants. One
respondent claimed to know everything about the Dayton Agreement and concluded that the
only positive effect it had was that it stopped the war, but that could have been in other ways as
well without the agreement. This participant did not speak in favour of the DA and wanted a
new one to be written which would include all citizens and religions. This opinion was
supported by three other interviewees who were also familiar with the DA. One of them
described the DA as the source of many problems of the country since it divided the society
more than unified it, thus in need of change. Similarly, since the situation in the country has
changed since the war, the constitution should change as well. Only one participant said that
he/she did not know anything about the DA except that it brought peace to the country.
23
Since the very institutional structure is founded upon the Dayton Agreement, none of the respondents who did not support the DA expressed support towards the institutional structure either. Note the difference between supporting democratic institutions in general and supporting the institutional structure in BiH specifically;
“Well, if… it depends on your starting point. If your starting point is a realistic one, which is the DA peace accord, then, of course, you have to support the basic institutions in the country (laughing). I told you already that the whole thing, the whole structure, the whole setup of the country is something that I would do otherwise. In that case, of course, there wouldn’t be so many assemblies and parliaments and so on, but it’s something that is there and cannot change easily.”
A bad foundation equals bad results. The interviewee with limited knowledge about the DA had another approach and meant that the institutional structure could work if it only were run by the right persons. As for now, the politicians take the parts of the DA that suits them - and when it suits them. Bad people will destroy any political system, despite how good its structure might be. No one supported the judicial system, and corruption was mentioned as a reoccurring problem throughout the interviews.
When finally speaking upon the political institutions in Yugoslavia, two respondents expressed indifferent support towards them, whereas respondent five noted that although the person did not support them, he/she trusted them more. Two interviewees were unable to answer the question since they did never reflect upon the matter at that time.
“ Well, to be honest, I can’t say that I support them or I don’t. (…) Because there was no reason to comment. Because… I can’t say that everything was perfect; perfect doesn’t exist, you know. But it has been very, very good. There is no reason to comment about government because everyone was being employed, you know. There is some part of time, like inflation or something like that, but government in that time, the government in that time did do a good job. And after a few years after inflation, again, you can feel that better times were coming. The leader must be here, at the moment in Bosnia, it is…
You can see that it is worse and worse is coming. They do nothing.”
Respondent five did not have stronger support towards the institutions in Yugoslavia since the people did not elect the regime.
6.2. The maximalist conceptualisation of democracy
The group which described ‘democracy’ with maximalist terms consisted of three females and two males. Two Bosniacs, two Serbs and one Croat qualified into this group and the mean age of the respondents was 62 years. Four interviewees lived in the Sarajevo area, whilst the fifth lived in Travnik. One participant had experience of living abroad (Switzerland).
In the category of maximalist democratic conceptualisation, the two most frequently occurring
sub-themes was labelled “welfare” and “labour rights”. The first sub-theme “welfare”
24
