This survey, Let them kill each other, has its aim and purpose to analyze how two of Swedens biggest tabloids, Aftonbladet and Expressen, reported about the Dayton agreement (also known as Dayton Accords, Paris Protocol and Dayton-Paris Agreement). To do so we analyzed both editorials and regular articles from 1995-10-09 to 1995-12-16. We discovered that the main opinion, both regarding editorials and articles, had a negative posture about the possibility for the partners to come to an agreement, and also later on, for the agreement to persist. We also found that the majority of the articles and editorials indicated a plain portrayal of whoever was the “winning” and “losing” side of the agreement.

I den här uppsatsen kommer korruptionens påverkan på Bosnien-Hercegovinas demokrati att analyseras. Korruptionen har ett starkt fäste inom landet då det ses som en vanlig del av samhället både från medborgare och politikerns synvinkel, detta ses som ett hinder för fortsatt utveckling på flera nivåer. Tanken finns, om att Daytonavtalet möjliggör för korruption på grund av avtalets stiftande av landets komplexa struktur och uppdelning. Uppsatsen metod är en fallstudie, där landets korrupta tillstånd kommer analyseras utifrån ett teoretiskt ramverk. Korruptionens påverkan på demokratin kommer att analyseras utifrån Marks Warrens (2004) teori: den moderna tanken om korruption, där korruptionens effekt inom olika domäner i samhället analyseras. Domänerna som undersöks är, den rättsliga makten, den legitima makten, den verkställande makten, den offentliga makten och det civila samhället. Utifrån en teoretisk analys av dessa domäner dras sedan slutsatsen om korruptionen haft någon påverkan på demokratin i landet. Trots demokratiska val är demokratin svår att upprätthålla om de demokratiska normerna i Bosnien-Hercegovina bryts genom korruption. Demokratin har påverkats starkt inom de ovannämnda domänerna och korruptionen är ett hinder för demokratins existens i Bosnien-Hercegovina. / In this paper, the impact of corruption on Bosnia-Herzegovina's democratic development will be analyzed. Corruption has a strong foothold in the country where it is seen as a normal part of society both from citizens and politicians' point of view; this is seen as an obstacle to further development at multiple levels. An existing idea is, that the Dayton agreement is enabling for corruption, because of the agreement's founding of the country's complex structure and division. The paper method is a case study, where the country's level of corruption will be analyzed from a theoretical framework. Bribery impact on democracy will be analyzed from Mark Warren's theory (2004): the modern idea of corruption, where corruption efficacies in various domains of society are analyzed. The domains under consideration are the legal power, legitimate power, the executive power, the public authorities and civil society. Based on a theoretical analysis of these domains, a conclusion is drawn about the corruptions impact of the democracy in the country. Despite democratic elections, democratic standards are difficult to maintain in Bosnia-Herzegovina, a country broken by corruption. The democracy has been strongly influenced in the domains mentioned, and corruption is an obstacle for democracy to exist in Bosnia-Herzegovina.

The purpose of this essay was to study the impact the Dayton Accords has had on the political society and the judicial society in Bosnia and Herzegovina today. In order to do so, the following questions were asked in the essay:“What does the political society look like in Bosnia and Herzegovina?”,“What does the judicial society look like in Bosnia and Herzegovina?” and ”What type of relation is there between the political and judicial society?”. By using consolidation theory and applying qualitative textual analysis it was conducted that Bosnia and Herzegovina is not a consolidated democracy yet. The country is a transitional or hybrid regimecharacterized by a political society that: partially meets the criteria required in the organization and issuance of political elections, it does not meet the criteria for an autonomous political society, it has a wide range of political parties, and alliances between parties are common, it has election rules that benefits the three largest ethnic groups, and lastly legislators have a partly independent role as long as new legislation does not contribute to any form of sabotage of the Dayton Accords. The country has a judicial society that is: complex and inefficient when it comes to the legal system, it has striking shortcomings in the judiciary and the rule of law, there has been only marginal progress in legislation, and the Dayton agreement has not promoted stability in the country but has instead enabled segregation and discrimination. To conclude, the relation between the political and judicial society is fragile. A reform of the Dayton Agreement, in which the agenda is greater civic inclusion, would enable Bosnia and Herzegovina to move towards a more consolidated democracy.

In this paper, a discussion and analysis on the Swedish participation  in the UN-mission in the Balkan conflict versus the reporting from the Swedish news press Dagens Nyheter (DN) of the same action is held. From a ground in survey questions to Swedish soldiers that took part in the conflict ,what they thought of the conflict and what got reported back to the Swedish civilians via the press and their differences is later held. A question in the survey also treats what the soldiers think got changed in the Swedish Armed Forces due to their actions in the conflict and what the soldiers thought of the view in the 1990s, national and international, on the Swedish Armed Forces. This survey and the articles  from DN that is analyzed is the ground in this papers issues, discussion and results. The paper overall and later the analysis is based on a theory in Oral history taken of Malin Thor's previous researches in the field and also strengthened with other researchers in the same field of studies.   The title to this paper is from the English press reporting about the Swedes taking charge of the UNPROFOR-mission in the Balkan conflict and is about the Colonel Ulf Henricsson, commander of the UN Nordic battalion (NordBat2) in central Bosnia and his firm hand and authority against the local warlords. Later the title went famous international and a lot of different newspapers used it as a headline when reporting about the Swedish soldiers acting aggressively and firmly towards the war-criminals when protecting civilians and their properties in Bosnia.

This study aims to investigate the democracy development i Bosnia and Herzegovina. Since 1995, when the Dayton Peace Agreement was signed, Bosnia has been undergoing an democratization, but despite that the country is still year 2017 classified as ”partly free”. In this study the democracy-enhancing factors: civil society and the political system are being related to the Dayton Peace Agreement and are tested against liberal democratic values and Consociational Democracy theory. This study is a qualitative case study and following questions are being looked into:   -       Which factors within the civil society and political system limit the democracy development in Bosnia and Herzegovina? -       To what extent does the Dayton Peace Agreement limit Bosnia and Herzegovina’s democracy development? -       To what extent is Bosnia and Herzegovina an Consociational Democracy?   The fact that Bosnia has a divided and multiethnic society puts a foundational ground for a possible consolidated consociational democracy. Furthermore, the functions of the civil society, political system and the Dayton Peace Agreement are being discussed and the shortcomings of each are being highlighted. The results of this study indicate that Bosnia’s long democratization development is primarly based on the unwillingness to cooperation between the three constitutional groups, the exclusion of minority groups and the Dayton Peace Agreement’s regulations on a political system that is not sustainable for a stable democratic state.

Fokus i denna uppsats kommer att ligga på de etniska konflikter som fortfarande pågår mellan de tre folkgrupper och den nya konstitutionen i landet sedan Daytonavtalet undertecknades. Vid krigets slut i Bosnien för ca fjorton år sedan då landet låg i spillror implementerades Daytonavtalet. Daytonavtalets  huvuduppgift var att sluta fred mellan de tre konfliktgrupperna samtidigt se till att landet utvecklas utan att minoriteterna skulle förtryckas. Medan Daytonavtalet lyckades stoppa kriget och uppehålla freden misslyckades den med statens sammanhållning och upprätthållning av en fungerande demokrati. Krisen i Bosnien har inte förändrats sedan krigets slut, de nationalistiska partierna av samtliga tre folkslag blir valda gång på gång, fattigdomen är fortfarande ett faktum och landet är fortfarande beroende av utländsk bistånd. Som det ser ut just nu går Bosnien inte en ljus framtid till mötes.