Definitions of War Violence and Genocide: Narratives of Survivors from the War in Bosnia and Herzegovina (original) (raw)
Related papers
Religion, Violence and Genocide: in Narratives of Survivors from the War in Bosnia and Herzegovina”
Religion and Violence. International Conference, The University of Vienna, the University of Innsbruck and the University of Tetova, Tetovo, Republic of Macedonia (20151016-20151018). ”Religion, Violence and Genocide: in Narratives of Survivors from the War in Bosnia and Herzegovina”, pp. 21-22. The starting point of this study is the war that took place in northwestern Bosnia and Herzegovina in the 1990s. Serbian soldiers and police targeted their use of violent force directly against the civilian populations in northwestern Bosnia. In their quest to expel Bosniacs and Croats from this area, Serbian soldiers and police used mass executions, forced flight, systematic rape, and concentration camps. The aim of this study is analyzing the narratives of survivors of the war in northwestern Bosnia. The focus lies on analyzing interviewees’ description of war-time violence and also analyzing discursive patterns that contribute in constructing the phenomenon “war violence”. Analysis shows that the interpersonal interactions that caused the violence continue even after the violent situation is over. Recollections from perpetrators and those subjected to violence of the war do not exist only as verbal constructions in Bosnia of today. Stories about violent situations live their own lives after the war and continue being important to individuals and social life. The crimes committed in northwestern Bosnia are qualified as genocide according to indictments against former Serbian leaders Radovan Karadžić and Ratko Mladić. All interviewees in this study experienced and survived the war in northwestern Bosnia. These individuals have a present, ongoing relation with these communities: Some live there permanently, and some spend their summers in northwestern Bosnia. Institutions in the administrative entity Republika Srpska (to which northwestern Bosnia now belong administratively) deny genocide, and this approach to war-time events becomes a central theme in future, post-war analysis of the phenomena “war violence”, and “reconciliation”. Therefore, it is very important to analyze the political elite’s denial of the systematic acts of violence during the war that have been conveyed by the Hague Tribunal, the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina on War Crime, and Bosnian media. The narratives in my empirical material seem to be influenced by (or coherent with) the rhetoric mediated in these fora. When informants emphasize extermination and the systematization of violence during the war, they produce and reproduce the image of a mutual struggle on a collective level. The aim of this struggle seems to be that the described acts of violence be recognized as genocide.
First Conference of Victimology in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Ambassadors of Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina, International Peace Research Association – IPRA, Bihać University, Sakarya University and Institute of Knowledge Management Skopje, Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina (20150303-20150304). ”Definitions of War Violence and Reconciliation in Narratives of Survivors from the War in Bosnia and Herzegovina” (”Definicije ratnog nasilja i pomirenje u pričama preživjelih poslije rata u Bosni i Hercegovini”), p. 9. In English Previous research on violence during the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina have emphasized the importance of narratives without focusing on narratives mentioning war violence, but they have not analyzed stories on war violence that were the product of interpersonal interaction and meaning-making activity. The aim of this study is to fill this knowledge gap by analyzing the narratives of survivors of the war in northwestern Bosnia in the 1990s. The focus lies on analyzing interviewees’ description of war-time violence and also analyzing discursive patterns that contribute in constructing the phenomenon “war violence”. Analysis shows that the interpersonal interactions that caused the violence continue even after the violent situation is over. Recollections from perpetrators and those subjected to violence of the war do not exist only as verbal constructions in Bosnia of today. Stories about violent situations live their own lives after the war and continue being important to individuals and social life. Individuals who were expelled from northwestern Bosnia during the war in the 1990s are, in a legal sense, in a recognized violence-afflicted victim category. Several perpetrators were sentenced by the Hague Tribunal and the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina on War Crime. The crimes committed in northwestern Bosnia are qualified as genocide according to indictments against former Serbian leaders Radovan Karadžić and Ratko Mladić. All interviewees in this study experienced and survived the war in northwestern Bosnia. These individuals have a present, ongoing relation with these communities: Some live there permanently, and some spend their summers in northwestern Bosnia. Institutions in the administrative entity Republika Srpska (to which northwestern Bosnia now belong administratively) deny genocide, and this approach to war-time events becomes a central theme in future, post-war analysis of the phenomena “war violence”, and “reconciliation”. Therefore, it is very important to analyze the political elite’s denial of the systematic acts of violence during the war that have been conveyed by the Hague Tribunal, the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina on War Crime, and Bosnian media. The narratives in my empirical material seem to be influenced by (or coherent with) the rhetoric mediated in these fora. When informants emphasize extermination and the systematization of violence during the war, they produce and reproduce the image of a mutual struggle on a collective level. The aim of this struggle seems to be that the described acts of violence be recognized as genocide. In Bosnian U ranijim istraživanjima ratnog nasilja, tokom rata u Bosni i Hercegovini, naglašavana je važnost priča ali fokus analize nije bio usmjeren na priče o ratnom nasilju, niti su analizirani poslijeratni intervjui kao produkt međuljudske interakcije. Ovom studiom pokušava se popuniti ta praznina analiziranjem priča osobe koje su preživjele rat u sjeverozapadnoj Bosni i Hercegovini. Prvi cilj studije je analizirati verbalne opise ratnog nasilja, drugi cilj je analizirati diskurzivne modele koji učestvuju u produkciji fenomena ”ratno nasilje”. Analiza pokazuje da se međuljudske interakcije koje uzrokuju nasilje nastavljaju i nakon što se nasilna situacija zavrsila. Sjećanja na počinitelje i žrtve nasilja iz rata ne postoje samo kao verbalnih konstrukcija u današnjoj Bosni. Priče o ratnim nasilnim situacijama se prepričavaju nakon rata i sa time bivaju važne za pojedince kao i za društvenu zajednicu. Individue koje su protjerane iz sjeverozapadne Bosne tijekom rata su, u pravnom smislu, priznata kategorija žrtve. Nekolicina počinitelja je osuđena od strane Haškog tribunala i Odjela za ratne zločine suda Bosne i Hercegovine. Prema optužnici Radovana Karadžića i Ratka Mladića, zločini počinjeni na području sjeverozapadne Bosne su kvalificirani kao genocid. Svi intervjuisani u ovoj studiji su doživjeli i preživjeli rat u sjeverozapadnoj Bosni. Ove individue su takođe i dio današnje društvene zajednice: Nekolicina živi permanentno u sjeverozapadnoj Bosni, a jedan dio, iz instanstva provodi ljeto, u sjeverozapadnoj Bosni. Institucije administrativnog entiteta Republike Srpske (kojem najveći dio sjeverozapadne Bosne administrativno pripada) negiraju genocid, i ovaj institucionalni pristup zločinima za vrijeme rata je izuzetno bitan za buduće analize fenomena "ratno nasilje" i "pomirenje". Stoga, je veoma važno analizirati kontekst konfliktnog odnosa političkih elita prema ovom pitanju koji se producira i reproducira između ostalog i raportiranjem Haškog tribunala, Odjela za ratne zločine suda Bosne i Hercegovine, kao i raportiranjem bosanskih medija. Čini se da su priče u mom empirijskom materijalu pod uticajem (ili u koherentnoj vezi) sa retorikom koja se presentira na ovim forumima. Kada informanti u studiji naglašavaju istrebljenje i sistematizaciju nasilja tokom rata, oni produciraju i reproduciraju sliku međusobne borbe na kolektivnoj razini. Čini se da je cilj ove borbe, da verbalno opisana djela ratnog nasilja dobiju status genocida poslije rata.
Criminal Justice Issues, 2018
Basic, Goran and Delić, Zlatan (2018) ”Genocide in northwestern Bosnia and Herzegovina: a sociological and pedagogical analysis of crimes against humans and against humanity during and after the war”. Criminal Justice Issues, XVIII(5-6): 37-58, http://krimteme.fkn.unsa.ba/index.php/kt/article/download/232/pdf The aim of this study is to reach a new understanding of genocide in northwestern Bosnia and Herzegovina during and after the Bosnian War (1992-1995). The analytical basis is a literature review of various studies from the domains of war sociology, social epistemology, and critical pedagogy. The analysis is based on the perspectives of the genocide in Bosnia as a process that began in northwestern and eastern Bosnia in 1992 and ended in Srebrenica in 1995 (in the Prijedor Municipality in northwestern Bosnia alone, more than 3000 civilians were killed in 1992). Even after mass crimes directed against the very idea of humanity-and after genocide-it is necessary to work on a pedagogy of notions focused on the politics of reconciliation and the politics of emancipation of the oppressed and disenfranchised. Therefore, it is important for the culture of peace and the politics of reconciliation to spread and promote the considerable theoretical experiences of critical pedagogy in education. We need a peaceful orientational knowledge that provides the basis for new identity politics to evolve, politics that respect the right to be different and the right to bravely distance ourselves from criminal identity politics.
Linking Theory and Practice: The Conduct of Sociology. 87th Annual Meeting of the Pacific Sociological Association, Pacific Sociological Association, Oakland, USA (20160330-20160402). ”War Violence, Sexual War Violence and Victimhood in Reconciliation Narratives of Survivors from the War in Bosnia and Herzegovina” (Panel with Presenters). In this analysis of the retold experiences of 27 survivors of the war in northwestern Bosnia, the aim is to describe the informants’ portrayal of “war violence”, “sexual war violence”, “victimhood”, and “reconciliation” as a social phenomenon as well as analyzing the discursive patterns that contribute to constructing the category “victim” and “perpetrator”. The violence practice during the war is portrayed as organized and ritualized and this creates a picture that the violence practice became a norm in the society, rather than the exception. When, after the war, different categories claim a “victim” status, it sparks a competition for victimhood. All informants are eager to present themselves as victims while at the same time the other categories’ victim status are downplayed. The stories of reconciliation are connected to the past; the interactive consequences of war-time violence are intimately linked to the narrator’s war experiences. The interviewees distance themselves from some individuals or described situations. It is common that the portrayal of possible reconciliation is transformed into a depicted implacable attitude, thus the interviewees negotiate their stances: they articulate between reconciliation and implacability statements. This study shows that after the war in Bosnia, the interpretations of biographical consequences of violence are intimately connected to previous war experiences. Narratives on the phenomenon “war violence” and “sexual war violence” depict a decay of pre-war social order. The use of violence during the war is described as organized and ritualized, which implies that the use of violence became a norm in society, rather than the exception. The narratives on the phenomenon “war violence” produce and reproduce the image of human suffering and slaughter. Those subjected to violence are portrayed in a de-humanized fashion and branded as suitable to be exposed to it. In these stories, morally correct actions are constructed as a contrast to the narratives on war violence. In these descriptions, the perpetrator is depicted as a dangerous, evil, and ideal enemy. He is portrayed as a real and powerful yet alien criminal who is said to pose a clear threat to the social order existing before the war. The narratives on wartime violence, war perpetrators, and those subjected to violence during war are enhanced with symbolicism of ritualized ethnic violence (“cockade,” “chetnik,” “Serb,” “Muslim,” “warlord”). On one hand, the narrators make an ethnic generalization based on the differences between the ethnic categorizations; on the other hand, they present their own physical existence and ethnic identity and that of those subjected to violence as being threatened by the violent situation. The disintegration of the existing, pre-war social order produces and reproduces a norm resolution that enables the ritualized war-time use of violence. This development allows the normalization of war violence in this time period even though the result, as this study shows, means human suffering and the slaughter of humans. This study presents this development in society ambivalently, as both allowed and normatively correct (during the war) and as prohibited and condemned (primarily in retrospect, in post-war narratives). It seems as if the category “war violence” and “sexual war violence” means different things depending on whether it happened during war or not, whether it is retold or observed, and who is telling the story. For some persons, violence targeting civilians during the war is an act of heroism. The Holocaust during World War Two was in many cases highly efficient and industrialized; the typical goal was to kill from a distance, impersonally. Researchers have noted that those who climbed the ranks to leadership positions or were in charge at concentration camps seemed to have engaged in very personal, sadistic acts in Germany during WWII. Is there an interaction of rank/power in wartime and level of motivation/energy input required for violence (ie, those in charge require less energy input because of the factors that put them in charge in the first place)? The stories and phrasing in this paper emphasize a distant, evil, and/or powerful leader who motivates the crowd (perhaps in part by symbolically reducing an ethnic target to something like a dog or rat) or gives orders, with the distinction from Holocaust violence that the leaders in these stories were neighbors, etc., of those they were harming and killing. In general contrast, the war violence in Bosnia was more broadly characterized by the individualized use of violence, in which the perpetrators often knew those subjected to violence. The stories reveal that firearms were seldom used; instead, the weapons were baseball bats or knives. These features can be compared to examples of violence in Rwanda, where the violence was more similar (and even more “savage”) to that in my material than the typical examples of industrialized extermination violence of World War Two. The perpetrators in this study are often portrayed as people who enjoyed humiliating, battering, murdering, and inflicting pain in different ways. This characterization is a contrast to Collins (2008), who suggests that soldiers are not good in acting out close violence and that individuals are mostly inclined to consensus and solidarity. An explanation, in my study, of the soldiers’ actions can be that soldiers in a war are pressured into being brave in close combat, the aim being to reign over the Others, the enemy. During war, enemies are targets of violence, to be subjected to it and neutralized. Soldiers and police in northwestern Bosnia were not close to any battlefield, and civilians thus were framed in the enemy role. By exposing civilians to violence, soldiers proved their supremacy over the enemy even when the enemy was an abstract type, unarmed and harmless. Another explanation might be found in the degree of mobilization and emotional charge that occurred before the war, through the demonization of the enemy. People were probably brutalized through this process. Those interpersonal interactions that caused the violence continue even after the violent situation is over. Recollections from perpetrators and those subjected to violence of the war do not exist only as verbal constructions in Bosnia of today. Stories about violent situations live their own lives after the war and continue being important to individuals and social life. Individuals who were expelled from northwestern Bosnia during the war in the 1990s are, in a legal sense, in a recognized violence-afflicted victim category. They suffered crimes against humanity, including most types of violent crimes. Several perpetrators were sentenced by the Hague Tribunal and the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina on War Crime. The crimes committed in northwestern Bosnia are qualified as genocide according to indictments against former Serbian leaders Radovan Karadžić and Ratko Mladić. All of the interviewees in this study experienced and survived the war in northwestern Bosnia. These individuals have a present, ongoing relation with these communities: Some live there permanently, and some spend their summers in northwestern Bosnia. An analysis of the processing of experienced or described violent situations in a society that exists as a product of a series of violent acts during the war must be conducted in parallel both at the institutional and individual levels. Institutions in the administrative entity Republika Srpska deny genocide, and this approach to war-time events becomes a central theme in future, post-war analysis of the phenomena “war violence,” “sexual war violence”, “victimhood,” and “reconciliation”. The existence of Republika Srpska is based on genocide committed in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Therefore, it is very important to analyze the political elite’s denial of the systematic acts of violence during the war that have been conveyed by the Hague Tribunal, the Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina on War Crime, and Bosnian media. The narratives in my empirical material seem to be influenced by (or coherent with) the rhetoric mediated in these fora. When informants emphasize extermination and the systematization of violence during the war, they produce and reproduce the image of a mutual struggle on a collective level. The aim of this struggle seems to be that the described acts of violence be recognized as genocide.
Definitions of Violence: Narratives of Survivors From the War in Bosnia and Herzegovina
Journal of interpersonal violence, 2016
Basic, Goran (2018) ”Definitions of Violence: Narratives of Survivors from the War in Bosnia and Herzegovina”. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 33(13): 2073-2097, DOI: 10.1177/0886260515622300. Previous research on violence during the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina has resulted in a one-sided presentation of the phenomenon of “war violence.” Researchers have emphasized the importance of narratives in general but have not analyzed stories on war violence that were the product of interpersonal interaction and meaning-making activity. The aim of this article is to fill this knowledge gap by analyzing survivor narratives of the 1990s war in northwestern Bosnia. The focus is on analyzing interviewees’ descriptions of wartime violence and the discursive patterns that contribute to constructing the phenomenon of “war violence.” My analysis reveals an intimate relationship between how an interviewee interprets the biographical consequences of war violence and the individual’s own war experiences. All interviewees described war violence as something that is morally reprehensible. These narratives, from both perpetrators of violence and those subjected to violence, recount violent situations that not only exist as mental constructions but also live on even after the war; thus, they have real consequences for the individuals and their society.
DO THE RIGHT THING! Anthropology and morality, The Swedish Anthropological Association and Lund University, Lund, Sweden (20150417-20150419). ”Construction of morally correct actions: in the stories of violence during the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina”, pp. 27 - 28. This article is based on different types of empirical material, especially recorded interviews, carried out with 27 survivors of the war in northwestern Bosnia and Herzegovina, and field observations. The focus lies on analyzing interviewees’ and field notes description of war-time violence and also analyzing discursive patterns that contribute in constructing the phenomenon “war violence”. This study shows that narratives on the phenomenon “war violence” depict a decay of pre-war social order. The use of violence during the war is described as organized and ritualized, which implies that the use of violence became a norm in society, rather than the exception. The narratives on the phenomenon “war violence” produce and reproduce the image of human suffering and slaughter. Those subjected to violence are portrayed in a de-humanized fashion and branded as suitable to be exposed to it. In these stories, morally correct actions are constructed as a contrast to the narratives on war violence. In these descriptions, the perpetrator is depicted as a dangerous, evil, and ideal enemy. He is portrayed as a real and powerful yet alien criminal who is said to pose a clear threat to the social order existing before the war.
Extreme case of insecurity: violence narratives of survivors from war in Bosnia and Herzegovina
Researching Security: Approaches, Concepts and Policies, University St. Kliment Ohridski, Faculty of Security, Skopje, Ohrid, Macedonia (20150602-20150603). ”Extreme case of insecurity: violence narratives of survivors from war in Bosnia and Herzegovina”, pp. 216-233. The Bosnian war can be seen as a particularly illustrative case of war sociology, based on the ethnic mix of the population prior to the war. War antagonists often knew each other from before the war. Serbian soldiers and policemen carried out mass executions, forced flight, and systematic rape and set up concentration camps in their effort to drive away Bosniacs and Croats from northwestern Bosnia and Herzegovina. The warfare was directly targeted against civilians. The material for the study was gathered through qualitative interviews with 27 individuals who survived the war in north-western Bosnia and Herzegovina. This study joins those narrative traditions within sociology where oral presentations are seen as both discursive- and experience-based. An interactionally inspired perspective on human interaction, through symbols and an ethno-methodological perspective on human stories is a general starting point. In addition, I perceive the concept of war violence as an especially relevant component in those specific stories that I analyzed. Previous research on violence during the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina presents a one-sided picture of the phenomenon ”war violence”. Researchers have emphasized the importance of narratives but they have not focused on narratives about war violence, nore have they analyzed the stories of war violence being a product of interpersonal interaction and meaning-making activity. This article tries to fill this knowledge gap by analyzing the narratives of survivors of the war in northwestern Bosnia in the 1990s. The aim is to analyze how the interviewees describe violence during the war, and also to analyze those discursive patterns that contribute in constructing the category ”war violence”. The analysis shows that the individual's interpretation of the biographical consequences of war violence are intimately related to the subjects own war experiences. All interviewees describing war violence as morally reprehensible. Narratives retelling violent situations, perpetrators of violence and subjected to violence does not only exist as a mental construction, stories live their lives after the war, and thus have real consequences for individuals and society.
War Violence, Victimhood and Reconciliation: in Stories of Bosnian War Survivors
‘I too, remember dust’: Peace-building, Politics & the Arts’, The University of Winchester, Winchester, England (20150907-20150908). ”War Violence, Victimhood and Reconciliation: in Stories of Bosnian War Survivors”, pp. 1-15. In this analysis of the retold experiences of 27 survivors of the war in northwestern Bosnia, the aim is to describe the informants’ portrayal of “war violence”, “victimhood”, and “reconciliation” as a social phenomenon as well as analyzing the discursive patterns that contribute to constructing the category “victim” and “perpetrator”. The violence practice during the war is portrayed as organized and ritualized and this creates a picture that the violence practice became a norm in the society, rather than the exception. When, after the war, different categories claim a “victim” status, it sparks a competition for victimhood. All informants are eager to present themselves as victims while at the same time the other categories’ victim status are downplayed. The stories of reconciliation are connected to the past; the interactive consequences of war-time violence are intimately linked to the narrator’s war experiences. The interviewees distance themselves from some individuals or described situations. It is common that the portrayal of possible reconciliation is transformed into a depicted implacable attitude, thus the interviewees negotiate their stances: they articulate between reconciliation and implacability statements.