The times to come testify that post-Yugoslav societies are gradually losing the characteristics of post-conflict, and it is becoming more obvious that these are pre-conflict or at least pre-totalitarian societies

Mirza Buljubasic

We are approaching the third decade since the end of one of the many bloody pages in the history of the post-Yugoslav space. Looking into that space through the rear-view mirror, it is not entirely clear what were the obstacles that made it impossible to face collective victimizations of the past, and why that is the case?

Rivers of delusion flowed in the belief that democratization, individualism and the reformation of clerical (ethno)nationalism would create an acceptable reach for dealing with the past.

Until now, catharsis, if at all credible, along with advocacy of individuals, has not had a particular impact on the confrontation of the whole, or at least significant parts, of the post-Yugoslav societies with the past.

Experience so far indicates that attempts at democratization can guarantee at least the mere absence of political violence, but not sustainable peace.

From where we are standing now, however, evaluation of processes of dealing with the past is less important; it may even be too late to consider the (failures) of previous activities in this sense.

The times to come testify that post-Yugoslav societies are gradually losing the characteristics of post-conflict, and it is becoming more obvious that these are pre-conflict or at least pre-totalitarian societies

The current state of affairs demonstrates that in the ruins of Yugoslavia – wars, brutal crimes, including genocide and aggression – everyday life has become occupied by the norms and values ​​of clerical (ethno)nationalism.

Daily life is filled with toxic political discourse and practices, and social structures cocooned in the past. The everyday can be summed up in a Kunderian way as the unbearable lightness of being.

Considering that previous activities aimed at dealing with the past could not effectively respond to the continuity of warfare by other means in political arenas, where the current state of peace is understood as the mere absence of violence, then a Copernican turn is needed.

The conventional forms of dealing with the past need to evolve. Several scientists, researchers and civil society organizations, including journalists, are sounding the alarm about the often-ignored threats and the need to engage in a fight against right-wing extremism as a normalised state. Therefore, it is necessary to transform the activity of dealing with the past to a reasonable extent, into the activity of opposing (extreme) right-wing (non)violent extremism.

If one wants to live liberal democracy to the fullest, it is necessary to face the past in the context of contemporary security, political and social challenges.

In order to achieve this, proponents of liberal democracy should not give up efforts to reach accountability for political violence and maintain the memory of past collective victimizations, including opposing historical revisionism.

Failures in dealing with the past should not be a reason to minimize  more or less successful responses to past crimes and victimization, especially not to completely exclude the paradigm of dealing with the past. On the contrary, we should understand that there are evolved aspects of the past in the present, which can influence the construction of the future, and this would require a response of society as a whole.

To begin with, it is necessary to direct civil society organizations from activities of conventional dealing with the past towards activities of preventing and opposing right-wing extremism, and mobilizing people from communities to initiate a series of small changes significant enough to cause a larger, more important change. If we continue to ignore or be defeatist towards the malignant spirit of the past that haunts the present, the processes of liberal democracy in fragile post-Yugoslav societies may be called into question. After that, with the growth of support for right-wing extremism in post-Yugoslav societies, the progress made in previous activities and conventional dealing with the past may become an unattainable ideal, if it hasn’t become so already.

 

Mirza Buljubasic, assistant at the School for Criminology and Security Studies at the University of Sarajevo