Is the Dayton Agreement a model for long-term peace? A problematic case of Bosnia and Herzegovina

The research focuses on Bosnia and Herzegovina in the post-conflict scenario. More than twenty-five years on, a weak, politicized, corrupt and inept system of government is characteristic of the post-conflict period and it is a result of deepseated interests of nationalists, ethno-nationalists, sectarianism and different factions. Although nationalism played a major role in the outbreak of the Yugoslav wars and in particular in the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, different authors point out at the international, economic and historical reasons as well. Manipulative ethnic and political leaders revive animosities among the peoples in Bosnia and Herzegovina and these, magnified by the press, are permanent threat to Bosnian peace and great obstacle to its prosperity as an independent country. It appears that the nationalism has penetrated every aspect of the Bosnian political life and there is little desire to focus on working towards common interest and eliminating discrimination among its citizens. Unsustainable approach of the international community towards the conflict and post war period, prolonged fighting that was a direct consequence of this approach and insistence that the Bosnian leaders agree on the necessary constitutional reforms within the constraints of the Dayton Peace Agreement has proved mission impossible and improbable. A major way of resolving this type of problem in the post conflict societies is to perfect the peace treaties ending the conflict. It is important to end violence and humanitarian disaster swiftly but it is also necessary to negotiate treaties that promote fairness, justice and efficiency in a country’s legal and political system