O presente trabalho investiga a influência do sistema internacional e de seus principais componentes no processo de construção e desconstrução da República Federativa Socialista da Iugoslávia. A partir da consideração dos conceitos de Charles Tilly sobre guerra e dominação, busca-se trazer a política e as relações internacionais para o centro da discussão sobre a questão iugoslava, a qual é comumente tratada apenas na perspectiva étnica. Assim, os principais fatos da trajetória iugoslava são pincelados à luz das estratégias político-econômicas dos grandes poderes mundiais em relação ao território balcânico. Para isso, analisa-se a criação e a dissolução da Iugoslávia pela ótica da teoria dos sistemas-mundo de Immanuel Wallerstein, para mostrar que a posição que este país ocupou no sistema mundial contemporâneo foi determinada pelos interesses estratégicos das grandes potências, que exerceram a dominação da região em termos políticos e econômicos. O propósito é mostrar que os principais pólos de poder do sistema-mundo da época incentivaram a criação do Estado iugoslavo em razão de interesses específicos, e instrumentalizaram o conflito étnico quando estes interesses já não mais existiam, com o fim da Guerra Fria e a queda do comunismo. / This study investigates the influence of the international system and its major components in the construction and dissolution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Considering Charles Tilly’s concepts on war and domination, we try to bring politics and international relations to the center of the discussion on Yugoslavia, which is often treated solely from the ethnicity perspective. Thus, the main facts of Yugoslav history are brushed in light of the political-economic strategies of the great powers over the Balkans. We analyze the creation and dissolution of Yugoslavia from the perspective of Immanuel Wallerstein's worldsystems theory, in order to show that the position occupied by this country in the contemporary world system was determined by strategic interests of great powers which have dominated the region politically and economically. The purpose is to show that the major powers encouraged the establishment of the Yugoslav state due to their interests, and when these interests no longer existed, they instrumentalized the ethnic conflict in the end of the Cold War and the fall of communism.

ŽÍLA, Ondřej: "Are You the One and Only Homeland I have?" Ethno-demographic Changes in Bosnia and Herzegovina 1945-2012 Abstract Thesis on "Are You the One and Only Homeland I have?" Ethno-demographic Changes in Bosnia and Herzegovina 1945-2012 analyses population development of three constitutive nations of Bosnia and Herzegovina, transformation of ethnic proportional representation of Bosnian population due to differences in demographic behaviour and spatial impacts of forced migration on population distribution after the end of the civil conflict in the 1990s. The main focus is on comparing the development of the ethno-demographic structure of socialist Bosnia and Herzegovina with the condition of the country after the war. The current demographic characteristics of the population, and contemporary ethnic composition of the country remains fundamentally affected by events related to the conflict: the so called forced migration and ethnic cleansing. The thesis compiles two fundamental approaches, one of them being the top-down approach. It focuses on the characteristics of the role of Western powers in the post-war peace-building process, specifically the analysis of their principal objective - restoration of the original ethnic heterogeneity by means of controlled repatriation of refugees, and evaluation...

O presente trabalho investiga a influência do sistema internacional e de seus principais componentes no processo de construção e desconstrução da República Federativa Socialista da Iugoslávia. A partir da consideração dos conceitos de Charles Tilly sobre guerra e dominação, busca-se trazer a política e as relações internacionais para o centro da discussão sobre a questão iugoslava, a qual é comumente tratada apenas na perspectiva étnica. Assim, os principais fatos da trajetória iugoslava são pincelados à luz das estratégias político-econômicas dos grandes poderes mundiais em relação ao território balcânico. Para isso, analisa-se a criação e a dissolução da Iugoslávia pela ótica da teoria dos sistemas-mundo de Immanuel Wallerstein, para mostrar que a posição que este país ocupou no sistema mundial contemporâneo foi determinada pelos interesses estratégicos das grandes potências, que exerceram a dominação da região em termos políticos e econômicos. O propósito é mostrar que os principais pólos de poder do sistema-mundo da época incentivaram a criação do Estado iugoslavo em razão de interesses específicos, e instrumentalizaram o conflito étnico quando estes interesses já não mais existiam, com o fim da Guerra Fria e a queda do comunismo. / This study investigates the influence of the international system and its major components in the construction and dissolution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Considering Charles Tilly’s concepts on war and domination, we try to bring politics and international relations to the center of the discussion on Yugoslavia, which is often treated solely from the ethnicity perspective. Thus, the main facts of Yugoslav history are brushed in light of the political-economic strategies of the great powers over the Balkans. We analyze the creation and dissolution of Yugoslavia from the perspective of Immanuel Wallerstein's worldsystems theory, in order to show that the position occupied by this country in the contemporary world system was determined by strategic interests of great powers which have dominated the region politically and economically. The purpose is to show that the major powers encouraged the establishment of the Yugoslav state due to their interests, and when these interests no longer existed, they instrumentalized the ethnic conflict in the end of the Cold War and the fall of communism.

O presente trabalho investiga a influência do sistema internacional e de seus principais componentes no processo de construção e desconstrução da República Federativa Socialista da Iugoslávia. A partir da consideração dos conceitos de Charles Tilly sobre guerra e dominação, busca-se trazer a política e as relações internacionais para o centro da discussão sobre a questão iugoslava, a qual é comumente tratada apenas na perspectiva étnica. Assim, os principais fatos da trajetória iugoslava são pincelados à luz das estratégias político-econômicas dos grandes poderes mundiais em relação ao território balcânico. Para isso, analisa-se a criação e a dissolução da Iugoslávia pela ótica da teoria dos sistemas-mundo de Immanuel Wallerstein, para mostrar que a posição que este país ocupou no sistema mundial contemporâneo foi determinada pelos interesses estratégicos das grandes potências, que exerceram a dominação da região em termos políticos e econômicos. O propósito é mostrar que os principais pólos de poder do sistema-mundo da época incentivaram a criação do Estado iugoslavo em razão de interesses específicos, e instrumentalizaram o conflito étnico quando estes interesses já não mais existiam, com o fim da Guerra Fria e a queda do comunismo. / This study investigates the influence of the international system and its major components in the construction and dissolution of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia. Considering Charles Tilly’s concepts on war and domination, we try to bring politics and international relations to the center of the discussion on Yugoslavia, which is often treated solely from the ethnicity perspective. Thus, the main facts of Yugoslav history are brushed in light of the political-economic strategies of the great powers over the Balkans. We analyze the creation and dissolution of Yugoslavia from the perspective of Immanuel Wallerstein's worldsystems theory, in order to show that the position occupied by this country in the contemporary world system was determined by strategic interests of great powers which have dominated the region politically and economically. The purpose is to show that the major powers encouraged the establishment of the Yugoslav state due to their interests, and when these interests no longer existed, they instrumentalized the ethnic conflict in the end of the Cold War and the fall of communism.

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.

This study has the ambition to examine and compare Angolas failed peace process with Bosnia-Herzegovina’s successful peace process through Kumar Rupesinghes theory in conflict transformation. By comparing the two peace processes through Rupesinghes theory we can get an answer why Angola’s peace failed while Bosnia-Herzegovina’s lasted.   This study has two purposes.   Based on a comparison of Angolas and Bosnia-Herzegovina’s peace processes, how well is it possible to explain the outcome of the two countries peace process?   How useful is Rupesinghes theory?   The study showed that Bosnia-Herzegovina employed factors from Rupesinghes theory, in a much higher sense than Angola. They were especially more successful in employing the economic factors from Rupesinghes theory. This therefore can be a reason why Angola’s peace failed while Bosnia’s lasted. In testing the theory’s usefulness the study showed that the theory is useful in many factors and can be used to give a qualified answer to why a peace lasts or fails. But the theory also has its flaws, some of the steps in the theory need a better explanation and some of the steps are more important depending on which country the theory is applied upon.     Key words: Angola, Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kumar Rupesinghe, conflict transformation, civil-war, peace, peace processes, Bicesse, Dayton

This essay investigates the post-war international intervention in Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Dayton Peace Treaty was welcomed as the first multilateral agreement amongst countries since the end of the cold war, including Russia. The treaty sought not only to end a war but wrote the Bosnian constitution. We see examples of state-building through international intervention in other parts of the world post-9/11 (Afghanistan, Iraq). The state-building actions in Bosnia was the first multilateral action after the cold-war it is therefore interesting to research the measures that were taken and to follow-up and investigate if it was a success or a failure. Bosnia today is falling behind other neighboring countries,  economically and democratically speaking. Neighboring Croatia has just recently become a new member state of the EU, many scholars along with member states of EU and the International Community agree that Bosnia should aim to reach the same goal as Croatia in order to ensure political and economical stability. However there seems to be conflicting agendas between the International Community and the local politicians. The essay will focus on the effects of the international intervention through state-building operations in Bosnia and how the international community took upon itself a major responsibility and the results of those efforts till today.

This paper explores the current understanding of the right of peoples to self-determination and its impact on international relations. A number of new states have gained international recognition outside the scope of decolonisation, several of which have not fulfilled the usual criteria for statehood, based on existing state practice. In addition, the parent states of Bangladesh, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina as well as Kosovo have not consented to the secession of these territories. The main purpose of this paper is to determine whether based on the stipulations of international documents and mainly on existing state practice, it is possible to verify the existence of a customary law enabling peoples to unilaterally secede. Such a right would pose a threat to the future application of the principle of territorial integrity as one of the basic principles of international relations. In order to answer this question I compare case studies of successful and unsuccessful nations striving for their own state outside the realm of decolonisation. Based on this comparison I analyse the current understanding of the right to self-determination and its impact on international relations. I conclude by stating that it is not possible to unambiguously confirm the existence of such a right. However, in practice the principle of territorial integrity is being breached nonetheless, due to persisting uncertainties regarding the possible application of secession by peoples whose internal right to self-determination was not respected. Together with the fact that the current concept of self-determination ignores collective rights of national groups, this poses a threat to international stability.

La Bosnie-Herzégovine est sous supervision internationale depuis 1995. Les principaux acteurs de cette communauté internationale soit l’Union Européenne (UE) et le Bureau du Haut-Représentant à la Communauté Internationale (OHR) ont exprimé à de nombreuses reprises leur intention de transformer la mission internationale en s’éloignant du pouvoir discrétionnaire du OHR en le remplaçant par la perspective d’intégration offerte par l’UE. Malgré les bonnes intentions, cette transition semble être dans une impasse. Depuis 2006, l’organisation et la distribution des responsabilités au sein de la communauté internationale sont restées inchangées. Ce mémoire s’intéresse à ces deux principaux acteurs et à leur rôle dans l’impasse. L’objectif est de tester trois cadres d’analyse soit le rationalisme, le constructivisme et la complexité des régimes pouvant expliquer cette impasse. En se basant sur des interviews avec des experts et des représentants des deux institutions, ce mémoire explore dans quelle mesure et dans quels contextes chaque cadre d’analyse est apte à expliquer le comportement des acteurs. / Bosnia and Herzegovina has been under international supervision since 1995. Key actors in the international community namely the Office of the High Representative (OHR) and the European Union (EU) have expressed a desire to change the focus of this mission from one led by the OHR to one led by the EU. Despite the strong will of the international community to carry out this transition, it seems to have reached a deadlock. In the last few years, the arrangement of the international community has remained unchanged. This thesis focuses on these two main actors in this transition and their responsibility in the deadlock. This thesis tests three frameworks in order to explain this deadlock, specifically rationalism, constructivism, and regime complexity. Drawing on interviews with experts and officials working in the European Union and in the Office of the High Representative, this thesis explores the suitability of these frameworks for explaining these actors’ behaviours.

This study is a qualitative interview study that examines antagonism, identity and collective memory among second generation immigrants from Bosnia & Herzegovina. The study is based on an existential history use-perspective and social constructivist socialization theory. The study shows that the Bosniak identity is seldom defined by their history and the Yugoslavian wars but rather by language and traditions. In addition, the results indicate that the Bosniak identity has been assimilated to a large extent into the Swedish majority culture. The results also show that antagonism against other ethnic groups in the Balkans mainly occurs among first-generation immigrants while the descendants do not relate to a large extent to the war crimes and atrocities that occurred against Bosnian Muslims. Instead, they express empathy and sympathy for their parents’ experiences of these traumas. The respondents also experienced a nonchalance towards their background in Swedish history teaching where their history was neglected in favor of other wars and genocides. While the respondents suspected a fear of conflict among teachers to account for the area, they also told examples when teachers failed in the relational pedagogy and homogenized the individuals by letting them represent an entire conflict and ethnic group. Overall, the study shows that the use of history is not a recurring phenomenon among second-generation Bosniak immigrants, and their attitude focuses on individuals rather than groups. In the didactic part of the study, the results emphasize that history teachers might need to self-educate based on the students' background to create a meaningful education and create a history awareness among students.