B&H with One Army?

Search for a Place within European Security

Despite all obstructions, obstacles and difficulties a military-security structure of B&H is in the making at the state level.

AIM, SARAJEVO, July 31, 2000

The defence of Bosnia and Herzegovina, i.e. the development of its security with all that this process implies, is again a much discussed subject. An immediate cause for this was the statement of NATO Secretary General, Robertson, during his recent visit to Sarajevo, that if B&H wanted to join European integrations it must develop its own army in the near future. After strong reactions that this statement provoked, especially those coming from the Republic of Srpska, the High Representative Wolfgang Petritsch, "took off the edge" by emphasising only elements from the Brussels Declaration of late May.

The whole story about a unified army in B&H is far from being simple. Actually, it all resembles a process with rather vaguely defined aim, although it is not very much clear to anyone how and in what way it could be attained. Several years ago, when that story sounded like political science fiction, some international representatives in various bodies in charge of regional security, explored the possibility of developing a unified, or as they called it, multi-national B&H army.

The problem of ethnicity and armies is not really a Bosnian speciality, and many other nations all over the world were one time or other in their past faced with it. In the initial stages, two things were always, although unofficially, pointed to by experts. The first was that in B&H this would be a painstaking job and not a short-term undertaking, and the other, that it would not be abandoned no matter what possible temptations or obstacles it may come across.

It is also evident that different solutions in the world are only a model that proves the rule that a way out of even the most complex situations can be found, but that no one can apply such patterns to the situation in this country, without due respect for its specificities. Since a process is in question, in military terms, a meaning was given to all its stages, such as political, economic, social and even broader ones, in the entire region, i.e. in the immediate B&H surroundings. But, if occasionally certain concessions or compromises are made in individual "stages", that does not apply to the ultimate aim. This is especially true, when, for example, Robertson's statement and demands from the Brussels Declaration, are compared. NATO Secretary General mentioned the ultimate goal, and the Declaration (in its Annex), speaks of only one stage of the process.

Let us recall that on May 23 and 24, a meeting of the Peace Implementation Council (PIC) was held in Brussels at which, inter alia, priorities for the new accelerated peace implementation stage, were determined. The Declaration which was published after the meeting, stated that B&H was entering a new stage in the search for its position within the system of European security. PIC referred to the so called Road Map of the European Union, and reminded B&H that the implementation of measures envisaged by that document, was one of the preconditions for getting closer to the Union. Annex to the Declaration specifically stated that the Standing Committee for Military Issues in B&H should urgently form a working group consisting of representatives of the entities' defence ministries, and provide financial support and work plan for the group. However, the Standing Committee should elaborate with great care "the desired future configurations of the present armed forces of entities, which should be balanced in relation to the planned budgets".

In addition, guidelines should be elaborated for the establishment of defence structures on the state level. In accordance with the provisions of the General Framework Peace Agreement, B&H authorities are obliged to intensify their confidence and security building activities(the exchange of military intelligence, control visits and inspection, joint training and education at all levels).

In other words, the Standing Committee for Military Issues should, together with the B&H authorities, develop a state defence structure and supervise joint security policy. This all points to a conclusion that the mentioned body would be transformed into a state, joint organ. If, on the other hand, these items from the Annex could be interpreted as "stage" targets, the Declaration itself, in no uncertain terms, gives the elements of the ultimate goal, i.e. that "B&H armed forces must have a unified command and control, which would be capable of joint deployment and action within international and regional security organisations".

What is the resent state of affairs and relations of two entities towards this process? In principle, many decisions from various international documents, treating military and security issues, have been implemented in both practice and life. In past years, military forces were reduced in accordance with the provisions of the Agreement on Subregional Arms Control. Although there were difficulties in this process and things did not always proceed smoothly, the job was done. Armed forces of the entities were also reduced, and further 15 percent reduction, envisaged for this year, is being carried out.

Building up of confidence and cooperation, with the assistance of international bodies and organisations, is also a successive process. An important step forward has been made in ensuring the transparency of the foreign military aid to entities' armed forces. In this context, the Military Aid Contract between Croatia and the Federation (resources for the Croatian component in the Federal Army) should be particularly emphasised.

Today, there are already visible signs of other changes being carried out. Obviously, something has also changed in the Republic of Srpska, where the plan on unified army has been refused and which did not show much enthusiasm for the idea on strengthening the Standing Committee (state level) or for the reorganisation programme which needs to be implemented as a precondition for joining Partnership for Peace. In the federal military forces, consisting of the B&H Army and the Croatian Defence Council, there is no such resentment towards this process, but despite successful development, the two-fold character is persistently insisted upon, which from the outside, and even from the inside, looks like two eggs in one basket. For the opponents of the development of a unified security structure in B&H, this came in handy as a good argument against the programme and stands advanced in the Declarations and documents, like the one from Brussels.

Nevertheless, the problem does not lie in military, but political structures. Obviously, irrespective of all circumstances and with the assistance and great engagement of the international community, the soldiers have done a remarkable job in the past several years. Actually, when it comes to the military, it showed unwavering resoluteness and readiness to push forward this multi-faceted process, making the least possible concessions and compromises along the way. It would be a mistake to conclude that, for example, the principle "one state, one army" is an objective in itself, and that it is aspired to just for the sake of creating conditions for joining the European integrations. This is one of the most important elements for the creation of a normal B&H as a state which, despite all its specificities, corresponds to the modern European order. This doesn't imply the army, but the politics, the one which represents an obstacle and which prefers disunity and divisions, and to have B&H, as neither fish nor meat, as someone has metaphorically put it.

If things are observed from this angle, then the greatest obstacle is in the sphere of politics. The Armies of Bosnia&Herzegovina have come out of the war as branches of certain national groupings, political parties and political leaderships. True, this was not equally and in the same way, present in all three armies. That is why, parallel to the process of creating a unified military-security structure, a process of depolitisation of these armies unfolded, i.e. a process of establishing a new form of political, civil control over armed forces.

The trouble is, that in modern democratic states such control is in the hands of political institutions which are developed, stable and functioning (parliaments, governments). In that respect, problems are numerous in B&H, especially in the political sphere.

That is how we come to certain conditionality, because of which the development of B&H armed forces, for which a doctrine and strategy have to be created, and all that placed within a political-military B&H Balkan and European environment, at the same time means creating a platform for the transformation of political structures which by their change, can also have a feedback effect on the resolution of many Gordian knots in the military field.

Since, as we have said, this is a multi-stage process and influenced, in a greater or lesser extent, by all changes occurring in B&H and its surroundings, question is how will the next stages look like, what will be their sequence and pace? What has happened in the last two, three months shows that the pace is quickening and that new changes could be expected. Let's give just one example: the decision on constitutional amendments and constitutiveness of all three nations on the entire B&H territory, will certainly have great influence on the relations within entities, on entities themselves, as well as on their armed forces.

Neven KAZAZOVIC

(AIM Sarajevo)