George Rosseter:

Bosanski plenumi – propuštena prilika?

Prošlogodišnji protesti u Bosni bili su predstavljeni kao početak ‘bosanskog proljeća’. Međutim, potencijal i zamke narodnih pokreta treba analizirati spram pozadine propuštene prilike za lokalno rješenje problema u Bosni

15.09.2015.

George Rosseter:

Bosnia’s plenums – a missed opportunity?

The protests in Bosnia last year were portrayed as the beginning of a ‘Bosnian spring’. However, the potential and pitfalls of popular movements need analyzing against the backdrop of a missed opportunity for a local solution to Bosnia’s problems.

15.09.2015.

Od ratova iz 1990-ih Bosna je ostala uveliko podijeljena duž etničkih linija. A ipak je 2014. svjedočila kako se stanovništvo u Bosni ujedinjuje protiv onog što neki smatraju najkompleksnijim i najkontradiktornijim političkim sistemom u svijetu, kao i protiv koruptivnog vođstva. Pokret ‘plenuma’ u Bosni bio je kratak ali je osvijetlio i potencijal i zamke lokalnih pokreta za pozitivnu promjenu u okviru ovog često duboko podijeljenog društva.

Uveliko motivirani loše provedenom privatizacijom državne industrije, radnici u Bosni izašli su na ulice Tuzle u februaru 2014. Studenti i drugi mladi ljudi su im se pridružili u izražavanju nezadovoljstva sa ustrojstvom i državom, a protesti su se danima nastavili i u Sarajevu. Društveni mediji pomogli su da se ovaj narodni pokret poveže, tako da su se etničke podjele rastopile pred većim socijalnim i ekonomskim pitanjima. Ovo su protestanti poduprli satiričnim sloganima kao što su “mi smo gladni na sva tri jezika”, u njihovom ‘aktu pobune protiv vlasti i rukovodeće strukture’.

Bosnia has remained largely divided along ethnic lines since the wars of the 1990s. Yet 2014 saw Bosnia’s population unite against what some consider the most complex and contradictory political system in the world, as well as its corrupt leadership. Bosnia’s ‘plenums’ movement was brief, but highlighted both the potential and pitfalls of local movements for positive change within this often deeply divided society.

Largely motivated by the botched privatisation of state industries, Bosnia’s workers took to the streets of the north-eastern town of Tuzla in February 2014. Students and other young people joined them in voicing their dissatisfaction with Bosnia’s shape and state, with the protests spreading to Sarajevo in days. Social media helped connect this popular movement, which saw ethnic divisions melt away in the face of the bigger social and economic issues. This was exemplified by protesters employing satirical slogans such as ‘we are hungry in all three languages’, in their ‘act of rebellion against the government and the ruling structure’.

Jedinstvo u pobuni

Međunarodni mediji često su ilustrirali ovu pobunu slikama zapaljenih zgrada i automobila, fokusirajući se na incidente nasilnog konfrontiranja između protestanata i vlasti. I tako je ova fiksacija na krajnosti ignorirala ujedinjujuću prirodu pobune, koja je našla mikrofon na plenumima ili ‘skupštinama građana’, koji su zaživjeli u gradovima i selima. Kao i protesti, plenumi su bili otvoreni za sve, bez obzira na pozadinu i etničku pripadnost. Umrežavanjem – posebno putem tehnologije informacija i komunikacija (ITC) – plenumi su omogućili običnim pojedincima da se angažiraju u političkom diskursu. Tako su plenumi brzo ponudili liste zahtjeva i na nacionalnom i na lokalnim nivoima, koje neki smatraju ‘artikulacijom ulice’.

Teoretičari društvenih mreža su optimistični prema ovakvim vrstama umrežavanja aktera civilnog društva. Tvrde da njihova fleksibilnost i domet, posebno u svjetlu razvoja u ICT, predstavlja značajan izazov za državne struktrure, omogućujući razvoj demokratije od dna ka vrhu koja odbacuje tradicionalno hijerarhijsku strukturu države. I protesti i plenumi iskazali su aspekte ove umrežene demokratije od dna ka vrhu.

I zaista, ICT su naglašeni kao temeljni za lakšu nacionalnu koordiniranost akcija, i širenje informacija i ideja. Osim toga, oni u to uključeni smatrali su da su društveni mediji jedini instrument preko kojeg će njihov glas biti emitovan: kao što je rekao jedan anonimni aktivista: “Sve poznate (nacionalne) TV stanice i novine su kao marionete različitih stranaka, manipulirajući velikim dijelom stanovništva.”

Neki zahtjevi su djelimično usvojeni – a neki čak i u cijelosti. Ovo do izvjesne mjere podržava ideju opadanja autoriteta države pred jedinstvenim, umreženim narodnim pokretima. Veliki dio komentara o događanjima bio je veoma optimističan, navodeći ih ‘kao novi model demokratije’ u Bosni, dok su drugi tražili ‘svu vlast plenumima’.

Međutim, istorija je pokazala da su predviđanja o ‘bosanskom proljeću’ pretjerala o uticaju i dugovječnosti ovog narodnog pokreta. Ustvari, nakon njihovog začetka početkom februara plenumi su prestali da postoje već u aprilu.

Unity in unrest

The international media often illustrated this unrest through images of burning buildings and cars, focusing on incidents of violent confrontation between the protesters and authorities. Yet this fixation on the extreme ignored the unifying nature of the unrest, which found a mouthpiece in the plenums, or ‘citizens’ assemblies’, that took shape in towns and villages. Like the protests, the plenums were open to all, regardless of background and ethnicity. Connected through networks – specifically through information and communications technology (ICT) and social media – the plenums enabled ordinary individuals to engage in the political discourse of the time. Consequently, the plenums quickly drew up lists of demands at both national and local levels, which some consider ‘an articulation of the voice on the street’.

Network theorists are optimistic for these types of networks of civil society actors. They argue that their flexibility and breadth, particularly in light of developments in ICT, significantly challenge state structures, enabling the development of a bottom-up democracy which counters the traditionally hierarchical state structure. Both the protests and the plenums movement displayed aspects of this networked bottom-up democracy.

Indeed, ICT were highlighted as fundamental in facilitating the national coordination of actions, and the spread of information and ideas. Furthermore, those involved considered social media to be the only tool through which their voice could be transmitted: as one anonymous activist said, “All prominent [national] TV stations and newspapers stand as puppets of different parties, manipulating [a] wide variety of people.”

Some of the demands were partly met – and some even completely. To an extent, this supports the idea of decreasing state authority in the face of unified, networked popular movements. Much of the commentary on events was highly optimistic, citing them as Bosnia’s ‘new model of democracy’, and others calling for ‘all power to the plenums’.

However, history has shown that the predictions of a ‘Bosnian Spring’ overstated the impact and longevity of this popular movement. Indeed, following their inception in early February, the plenums ceased to exist by the following April.

Ograničenja i mogućnosti narodnih pokreta

Ovo nudi uvid i u ograničenja i u mogućnosti za buduće narodne pokrete koji traže promjenu državnih struktura. Iako zvanično apolitični, plenumi su brzo zadobili ljevičarski karakter. Ovo možda ne iznenađuje, posebno zbog njihovog nastanka među fabričkim radnicima i studentima. Ali ovo je odvratilo pažnju od nefunkcionalnog političkog sistema i istovremeno izoliralo pokret od institucija kao što su vlade SAD I EU, što je dovelo do minimalne vanjske podrške za njihovu stvar.

I zaista, međunarodni odgovor na plenume osvjetljava kontradiktornu poziciju moćnih međunarodnih igrača. Uprkos dugogodišnjem vanjskom pritisku na Bosnu da preuzme odgovornost za svoje probleme i obezbijedi rješenja u zemlji, takvo rješenje nije bilo rješenje koje su ti vanjski uticaji tražili. Štaviše, pokreti su odlučili da ostanu odvojeni od političkog toka, izolirajući ga od uticajnih kreatora politike čija bi im podrška možda dala glas i veće težine i šireg dometa. A ipak su skepticizam u odnosu na angažiranje sa ‘kleptokratskom’ političkom elitom, kao i snažna želja za preraspodjelom s obzirom na loše upravljanje elite državnom imovinom bili naglašeni kao žarišne tačke za svaki bosanski narodni pokret.

Osim toga, tvrda policijska taktika i prijetnje reperkusijama ako se nastave protesti i učešće u plenumima naveli su aktiviste da se udalje od angažiranja u etabliranom političkom procesu i mnoge navela da sve to potpuno napuste.

Tako kratak život plenuma može da ponudi primjer ograničenja do kojeg umreženi protest može predstavljati izazov za državnu vlast i organizacijsku hijerarhiju. Ipak, snaga državnog odgovora na plenume takođe naglašava nelagodnost koju su osjetile političke elite pred tako jedinstvenim nezadovoljstvom. Osim toga, njihovo kratko postojanje ukazalo je da dominacija etniciteta nad životima građana u Bosni nije neizbježnost. Iako je u Bosni otad relativno mirno, i dalje tinja veliko nezadovoljstvo u narodu.

Pokret plenuma bio je prava prilika da se angažiraju i razviju rješenja za tešku situaciju u Bosni. Sada, sa upozorenjima građana kao što su “dokad možemo zaista patiti’, naglašava se potreba da se želje stanovništva shvate ozbiljno, i postaje sve očitije da je njihov neuspjeh bio velika propuštena prilika.

The limitations and possibilities of popular movements

This provides an insight into both the limitations and possibilities for future popular movements that seek to change state structures. Although officially apolitical, the plenums quickly adopted a left-wing character. This was perhaps unsurprising, especially given their origins amongst factory workers and students. However, this distracted attention from the dysfunctional political system, and simultaneously isolated the movement from institutions such as the US and EU governments, leading to minimal external support for their cause.

Indeed, the international response to the plenums highlights the contradictory position taken by such powerful international players. Despite longstanding external pressure on Bosnia to take ownership of its problems and provide locally driven solutions, the locally driven solution that occurred was not the solution that these external influences sought.

Furthermore, the movement decided to remain separate from the political mainstream, isolating it from influential political decision makers whose support may have given their voice both greater weight and a broader reach. Yet scepticism of engaging with the ‘kleptocratic’ political elite as well as a strong desire for redistribution given elite mismanagement of state assets have been highlighted as focal points for any Bosnian popular movement.

In addition, heavy handed police tactics and threats of repercussions in case of continued protests and involvement in the plenums both drove activists away from engaging in the established political process and led many to abandon the cause altogether.

Thus, the plenums’ short life may provide an example of the limited extent to which networked protest can challenge state power and organisational hierarchy. However, the forcefulness of the state’s response to the plenums also highlighted the unease felt by political elites in the face of such unified dissatisfaction. Furthermore, their brief existence indicated that the domination of ethnicity over the lives of Bosnia’s citizens is not an inevitability. Whilst Bosnia has remained relatively peaceful since, considerable discontent within the population persists.

The plenum movement was a clear opportunity to engage and develop locally driven solutions to Bosnia’s difficult situation. Now, with warnings from citizens such as ‘how long we can actually suffer,’ highlight the need to take the populations’ desires seriously, it is becoming ever more apparent that their failure was a huge opportunity missed.

George Rosseter

George Rosseter

​Prvobitno je objavljen na TransConflict / Insight on Conflict portalima.

Prevod: Dijalog BiH2.0

It was originally published on the TransConflict / Insight on Conflict portals.

Odgovornost za informacije i gledišta iznesena u ovom članku, isključivo leži na autorima i nužno ne odražavaju mišljenje urednika Dialogue - BiH2.0 – Dijalog, njegovog savjetodavnog odbora, Tufts univerziteta, partnera, pobornika i donatora.

Responsibility for the information and views set out in this article lies entirely with the authors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the Dialogue - BiH2.0 - Dijalog Editors, its Advisory Board, Tufts University, Partners, Supporters and Donors.}

DIALOGUE - BIH2.0 - DIJALOG je posvećena promociji otvorenog pristupa politici, informacijama i djelovanju vlasti, na prostoru Bosne i Hercegovine.
DIALOGUE - BIH2.0 - DIJALOG is committed to promoting Open Policy, Open Information, and Open Government across Bosnia-Herzegovina.

© DIALOGUE - BIH2.0 - DIJALOG (2015)