{ "id": "R45691", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "number": "R45691", "active": true, "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "versions": [ { "source": "EveryCRSReport.com", "id": 596321, "date": "2019-04-15", "retrieved": "2019-04-17T13:40:35.856782", "title": "Bosnia and Herzegovina: Background and U.S. Policy", "summary": "Bosnia and Herzegovina (hereafter, \u201cBosnia\u201d) drew heavily on U.S. support after gaining independence from Yugoslavia in 1992. The United States helped end the Bosnian war (1992-1995), one of the most lethal conflicts in Europe since the Second World War, by leading NATO airstrikes against Bosnian Serb forces, brokering the Dayton Peace Agreement in 1995, and deploying 20,000 U.S. troops. Some Members of Congress became involved in policy debates over these measures, and Congress monitored and at times challenged the Bush and Clinton Administrations\u2019 response through numerous hearings, resolutions, and legislative proposals. Since 1995, the United States has been a major source of aid to Bosnia and firmly supports its territorial integrity. The United States also supports Bosnia\u2019s aspirations for NATO and European Union (EU) membership.\nToday, Bosnia faces serious challenges. Nearly 25 years after the Dayton Agreement, Bosnia continues to use part of the Agreement as its constitution, which divides the country into two ethnoterritorial entities. Critics charge that Bosnia\u2019s political system is too decentralized to enact the reforms required for NATO and EU membership. They also contend that the ethnic power-sharing arrangements and veto points embedded in numerous government bodies are sources of gridlock. Domestic and international courts have ruled against several aspects of Bosnia\u2019s constitution, yet the Bosnian government thus far has failed to implement these rulings. \nSince Bosnia\u2019s independence, its politics has been dominated by ethnic parties representing the country\u2019s three main groups: Bosniaks (Slavic Muslims), Croats, and Serbs. These parties have prospered under a system that critics charge lacks transparency and accountability. Critics also maintain that ethnic party leaders use divisive nationalist rhetoric to distract from serious issues affecting the country as a whole, including poverty, unemployment, and stalled political reforms. The Bosnian population exhibits low trust in political parties and the government, and disaffection toward the country\u2019s elite. \nU.S. and EU officials brokered several ultimately unsuccessful rounds of constitutional reform negotiations, and continue to call on Bosnia\u2019s leaders to implement reforms to make governance more efficient and effective, dismantle patronage networks, and bring Bosnia closer to EU and NATO membership. However, there is little consensus among the country\u2019s leaders on how the country should be reformed. Bosnian Serb leaders from the Serb-majority entity (Republika Srpska) have called for greater autonomy and even secession from Bosnia. Some Bosnian Croat leaders have called for partitioning Bosnia\u2019s other entity, the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, to create a separate Croat-majority entity. Bosniak leaders, by contrast, generally prefer a more centralized state. Many analysts caution that any move to partition the country could lead to renewed violence, while greater decentralization could make Bosnia\u2019s government less functional. U.S. policy has long been oriented toward preserving Bosnia\u2019s statehood. Bosnia\u2019s 2018 general elections largely returned to power the same entrenched ethnic parties. Of particular concern is the election of Bosnian Serb leader Milorad Dodik to Bosnia\u2019s collective presidency. Dodik, a sharp critic of the United States and NATO, has periodically called for a referendum on Republika Srpska\u2019s secession. He is under U.S. sanctions for obstructing the Dayton Agreement. \nIn addition to these internal challenges, U.S. and EU officials have expressed concern over external influence in the region. Russia reportedly relies on soft power, energy leverage, and \u201cspoiler\u201d tactics to influence Bosnia, particularly in the Serb-majority entity. Turkish soft power draws on Bosnia\u2019s Ottoman-era heritage and Turkey\u2019s shared religious tradition with Bosniaks. China is a more recent presence in the region, but its heavy investments and lending have prompted concern on both sides of the Atlantic. Policymakers have also expressed concern at the challenges posed by the return of Bosnians who fought with the Islamic State and Nusra Front in Syria and Iraq. \nMany observers contend that the United States remains a stakeholder in Bosnia\u2019s future because of its central role in resolving the conflict and shaping the postwar Bosnian state. Given the history of U.S. involvement in Bosnia, Bosnia\u2019s importance to regional stability in the Balkans, and concerns over Russian and Chinese influence in Bosnia, Members of Congress may be interested in monitoring how the country navigates its internal and external challenges. Congress may also consider future U.S. aid levels to Bosnia and the degree to which such assistance supports the long-standing U.S. policy objectives for Bosnia of territorial integrity, NATO and EU integration, energy security, and resilience against malign influence.", "type": "CRS Report", "typeId": "REPORTS", "active": true, "formats": [ { "format": "HTML", "encoding": "utf-8", "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/R45691", "sha1": "ed7dfbb187caea7063a9c8630fd4f4194df4cf34", "filename": "files/20190415_R45691_ed7dfbb187caea7063a9c8630fd4f4194df4cf34.html", "images": { "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45691_files&id=/1.png": "files/20190415_R45691_images_1da7d0de9e4d2319d7b9c36bf138b9b6ca404d07.png", "/products/Getimages/?directory=R/html/R45691_files&id=/0.png": "files/20190415_R45691_images_086af71f943d46c195443753a7264e673fb2f7e0.png" } }, { "format": "PDF", "encoding": null, "url": "https://www.crs.gov/Reports/pdf/R45691", "sha1": "fce7e4794492e11714ee7e0a2eb0fd6563d9392f", "filename": "files/20190415_R45691_fce7e4794492e11714ee7e0a2eb0fd6563d9392f.pdf", "images": {} } ], "topics": [ { "source": "IBCList", "id": 4786, "name": "Europe, Russia, & Eurasia" } ] } ], "topics": [ "Constitutional Questions", "Economic Policy", "Foreign Affairs", "Intelligence and National Security" ] }