The Dayton Agreement

On December 14, 1994, the signature of the Dayton agreement put an end to the violent intrastate conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH). This war, which began in 1992 following the country’s proclamation of independence from Yugoslavia, led to an estimated 100,000 casualties. To understand this intricate regional conflict, let us clarify although the entire population was of Slavic ethnicity, tensions divided Muslim Bosnians from Bosnian Croats or Bosnian Serbs. As of 1994, the armed struggle physically opposed a coalition comprised of the governmental forces of BiH, Bosnian Croats, Croatia and NATO, and on the other side militias and self proclaimed proto-states such as the Republika Srpska or Western Bosnia (Bosnian Serbs supported by Serbia). This conflict can be mainly summarised as a rivalry of nationalism, which transformed into an international struggle with the involvement of NATO and UN forces. Three of the presidents implicated in the broader Yugoslavian conflict were part of the negotiations: Slobodan Milošević (Serbia), Franjo Tuđman (Crotia) and Alija Izetbegović (BiH). However, this agreement was influenced and witnessed by several actors, including but not limited to: the United States, Russia, and international organisations such as NATO and the European Union. To what extent was this agreement successful ? We will first highlight the complex difficulties which delayed peace processes, before focusing on the objectives and impacts of the agreement; finally, we will discuss its key success factors.

Numerous treaties were created and breached during the Bosnian War. These successive failures revolved around three key elements. To begin with, motivation: the Bosnian Serbs, who controlled most of the territory (46%) and had the upper hand, had therefore little incentives to negotiate at the risk of losing their advantage. Then, coercion: the strong influence and support of Croatia and the Republic of Yugoslavia (Serbians) on the minorities in BiH further fuelled internal division. Finally, misinterpretation: inside the Bosnian population, each party sought recognition, but some actors shifted their alliances or split, and it was consequently difficult to fully grasp and manage the situation.

These previous attempts, however, allowed for a better treaty to be studied and created: the Dayton Agreement fulfilled the entirety of its objectives. First, it served as an initial and efficient ceasefire between the main belligerents, and as such an opportunity for peaceful and constructive dialogues. Secondly, the agreement preserved Bosnia as a single united nation - and consequently settled the core of the conflict. This laid durable foundations. Thirdly, BiH, Croatia, and the remaining Yugoslavia republic (controlled by Serbians) agreed to respect the sovereign integrity of one another, which recreated the basis for regional security and interstate trust. Finally, the actors agreed to cooperate at an international level: they allowed external actors to enforce the accords, prevent another conflict, rebuild the Bosnian state and ensure the implementation of international human rights.

As such, one can argue that the pressure of world powers was a key factor and prerequisite for the success of the agreement. The United Nations, NATO and the US were militarily present during the war, to prevent further material and human destruction through an extension of the

...