This thesis is of an historical nature and deals with two institutions in Bosnia and Hercegovina: waqf and the Library of Gazi Husrev bay. These institutions are placed in a societal context which makes it easier to understand their origins, development and decline. The purpose of this thesis is to describe and analyze the history of the Library of Gazi Husrev bay and its specific characteristics as well as analyze the institution of waqf in a societal context. The questions posed by this thesis are: What is waqf and its meaning? What are its benevolent as well as hostile periods? How did the Library of Gazi Husrev bay and its mission develop? The thesis is limited to waqf in its societal context. The method used consists of a qualitative literature study with source criticism and hermeneutics as methods of interpretation. The study shows that waqf is an important societal institution which has roots dating back to early Islamic history, that waqf had/has great importance in the education of Bosnians and the development of society in general, and that it was/is a widespread phenomenon in Bosnia. The thesis also shows that waqf experienced a number of hostile and benevolent periods as well as a neutral one. When it comes to the Library of Gazi Husrev bay, the thesis shows the library’s arduous history, its mission as well as its role in the preservation of Bosnia’s cultural heritage. / Uppsatsnivå: D

Zugl.: Erlangen, Nürnberg, Univ., Diss., 2006

<p>The purpose of this study is to analyze how the parties (USA, Great Britain, UN and the European Union) legitimize their intervention in Bosnia-Herzegovina as seen from without the conceptions of sovereignty and intervention. </p><p>USA and the UN have legitimized their intervention on security reasons. The American president, George W. Bush, claimed that democracies never engage in war with each other and that democracies were prosperous just because they were democracies. According to the president, that is why it is important to democratise the whole Balkan region to protect the international community from terrorism which grows in unstable and undemocratic states. UN resolutions claim that the situation in Bosnia is a threat to international peace and security and urged all state members to do everything they can for stability in Bosnia-Herzegovina. </p><p>European Union and Great Britain saw the organized crime that spreads through Balkan as a major threat to Europe. To be able to deal with his problem, EU is asking for more cooperation among the European states. Bosnia is a member of the Council of Europe and is also involved in the Stabilisation and association process for South eastern Europe with the EU. The purpose of these memberships is to foster the political and economic development in Bosnia and lead to full membership in the European Union, but only if Bosnia fulfils all the reforms that EU demands. To get economic aid from the EU, Bosnian leaders are forced to reform and engage in regional cooperation. </p><p>In the long run democratisation is the goal for all the parties, while security is the main issue at short-term. That is why the main concern for USA is for now the war on terrorism and organized crime for the EU. When signing the Dayton peace agreement, Bosnian leaders have agreed upon sharing sovereignty with the international community indefinitely. Dayton agreement calls also on all the parties to help Bosnia develop stable and democratic institutions and help the Bosnian leaders in theirs strive for peace. </p><p>The international community is based on principles of state sovereignty and non-intervention. Sovereignty can be defined as the right for autonomy and the right for non-intervention. These principles are not as important today as they were during the Cold War. Globalisation and marginalisation has made it more acceptable to intervene and share sovereignty with other states and ganisations. That means that the traditional view on sovereignty as a mean for maintaining order and view on interventions as a threat to the sovereignty is less significant in modern times. The reason for this is that the definition on sovereignty and intervention changes to able to adjust its self to the political situation in the world. That is, definition on sovereignty and interventionwill differ from time to time.</p>

<p>stater bildats på internationellt initiativ vilket verkade fungera under 40 år för Jugoslavien men de etniska motsättningarna i landet utnyttjades av nationalistiska partier efter kommunismens fall vilket trappade upp de etniska konflikterna och resulterade i ett inbördeskrig som varade i fyra år. 1994 hölls det ett fredssamtal i Dayton vilket resulterade i ett fredsavtal, The General Framework Agreement for Peace (GFAP). I GFAP gavs OSSE, som är den största regionala säkerhetsorganisationen i världen med 55 medlemsstater från Europa, Centralasien och Nordamerika, uppdraget att säkra freden och demokratisera landet. Detta innebar en demokratisering uppifrån med en begränsad möjlighet till inflytande vad det gäller den bosniska befolkningen. Detta reser frågan om denna sortens demokratiexports möjlighet till framgång? Den internationella interventionen och fredsavtalet som följde syftade inte bara till att få slut på kriget i regionen utan också till att skapa helt nya institutioner för interagerande i alla delar av statsapparaten och det civila samhället. Den demokratiska processen i Bosnien kräver väl fungerande institutioner på alla nivåer inom statsapparaten samt ett fungerande civilt samhälle. Utan dessa kan inte en demokratisering genomföras. Därför har OSSE:s demokratiseringsprojekt fokuserats på två övergripande frågor. Den ena är att omvandla institutioner från en formell demokrati med en rad officiella regelsystem, institutioner och procedurer till en substantivdemokrati inkluderande politisk jämlikhet, maktfördelning en politisk kultur och demokratisk delaktighet. Men endast demokratiska institutioner är inte nog för att skapa ett demokratiskt system, för att skapa en livskraftig och uthållig demokrati måste det även finnas en medborgarkår med demokratiska värderingar, vare sig dessa uppbringas genom propaganda eller utbildning. Därför är det fokus för OSSE att skapa ett aktivt civilt samhälle och medverkandekultur samt främja medborgarnas deltagande i statens angelägenheter. Övergångsteorin som är uppsatsen teoretiska utgångspunkt ser på demokrati som skapad av medvetna och hängivna aktörer med en vilja till kompromissande. Historiska exempel har visat att en demokratisk utveckling kan startas och lyckas även om den genomförs uppifrån och i ett samhälle som saknar en stark demokratisk kultur. Härigenom kan demokrati skapas även om människor inte vill ha den, eller kan hantera den på ett effektivt sätt. En rad projekt har startats i Bosnien för att åstadkomma denna demokratiska förändring, men framstegen har varit svåra att få till stånd samt varit tidsödande. Mycket av problematiken i Bosnien grundas i de etniska konflikterna mellan de olika grupperingarna i landet och att dessa har sina lojaliteter riktade mot andra håll än mot den Bosniska staten. Politisk konkurrens bygger fortfarande mycket på etnicitet och de bosniska politikernas har en uppenbar vana att sätta käppar i hjulen på den demokratiska processen och reformarbetet. Den djupa misstron mellan de olika etniska grupperna efter kriget och en avsaknad av en stabil demokratisk värdegrund ställer höga krav på OSSE:s arbete och har visat sig svåra att överkomma. Den demokratiska utvecklingen har gått långsamt, mycket långsammare än vad det internationella samfundet hade hoppats på, men framsteg görs. Frågan är om demokratiexport kan fungera i ett land så djupt splittrat som Bosnien, i alla fall på en så kort tid som har förflutit. Ett generationsskifte är kanske vad som behövs för att en riktig demokrati skall kunna slå rot, men omdemokratisering uppifrån kan fungera i Bosnien får tiden utvisa. Men en sak är säker Bosnien idag är en bättre plats än var den var i början av 1990-talet och OSSE:s arbete har resulterat i en framgångar.</p>

<p>Den här uppsatsen är en fallstudie av nationalismen som spelande roll för att Kroatien och Bosnien bröt sig ur Jugoslavien samt dess betydelse för att krig bröt ut i dessa två regioner.</p><p>När den jugoslaviske presidenten Tito dog 1980 och när kommunismen föll i Europa i slutet av 1980-talet började Jugoslavien gå mot sitt sönderfall. Därmed började nationalistiska stämningar och etnisk separatism ta fart. Kroatien och Bosnien var två länder som förklarade sig som självständiga i början av 1990-talet efter att nationalistiska krafter vunnit stark terräng där. I både Kroatien och Bosnien ledde självständighetssträvandena till konflikt med den serbiska minoriteten och det resulterade i blodiga krig. De serbiska nationalisterna valde som svar att förklara sig som autonom inom dessa länder, men det kom att leda till en eskalerande konflikt med Kroatien och Bosnien. Konflikterna i dessa länder ledde till etnisk rensning och mord på civila människor från alla folkgrupper. Den etniska nationalismen som tillämpades här ledde till att krig bröt ut och att gamla motsättningar blossade upp. Efter ett par år tog krigen i Kroatien och Bosnien slut.</p>

<p>The purpose of this essay is to examine the approach of the EU towards the reform efforts of Turkey and Bosnia and Herzegovina in the countries ambitions for EU memberships. The question formulation of the essay is whether there is differences in Turkey’s and Bosnia and Herzegovina’s qualifications for an EU-membership from an EU perspective. In order to better answer the question, we use two part questions. One is about the criterias and qualifications that need to be met in order to get a membership. The other one is about the approach of the EU towards the two countries concerning EU memberships. Primarily we use official EU documents from which we make a qualitative content analysis. As an advanced feature, we use a comparative analysis in which the countries are compared in relation to each other. The conclusion of our study is that the EU's approach to Turkey's qualification for EU membership is more positive than to Bosnia and Herzegovina. We also conclude that other circumstances may affect our conclusion, and therefore our findings cannot be considered definite.</p><p>Keywords: EU, Turkey, Bosnia and Herzegovina, The Copenhagen criteria, democracy, rule of law, human rights, protection of minorities, enlargement.</p>

This essay has the ambition to examine and compare Croatia’s and Bosnia and Herzegovina’s development towards a consolidated democracy. By applying Linz &amp; Stepen’s theory on how to consolidate a democracy and put focus on political society, behavioral patterns, attitude and constitutional structure the purpose is to find similarities and differences between Bosnia and Croatia within this field. The focus of this study is to compare two similar countries that have developed in very different ways. By applying the theory and a comparative method the purpose is to examine why two so similar countries with so much in common have developed in so different ways? In order to better answer the question there are two part questions and these are: What difficulties, concerning consolidation of democracy, have Croatia and Bosnia faced since the democratic transition in the beginning of the 1990s? What similarities and differences in the area of democratic consolidation (with focus on political society, behavioral patterns, attitude and constitutional structure) are there between the two countries? As the analysis shows, the main reason why these two countries differ so much is that Bosnia is a divided country with different nationalities and each nationality only wants to realize its own interest and does not care about what is best for the country as an entity. However, Croatia has recently realized that democracy is the best for the country and its development.

The purpose of this essay is to examine the approach of the EU towards the reform efforts of Turkey and Bosnia and Herzegovina in the countries ambitions for EU memberships. The question formulation of the essay is whether there is differences in Turkey’s and Bosnia and Herzegovina’s qualifications for an EU-membership from an EU perspective. In order to better answer the question, we use two part questions. One is about the criterias and qualifications that need to be met in order to get a membership. The other one is about the approach of the EU towards the two countries concerning EU memberships. Primarily we use official EU documents from which we make a qualitative content analysis. As an advanced feature, we use a comparative analysis in which the countries are compared in relation to each other. The conclusion of our study is that the EU's approach to Turkey's qualification for EU membership is more positive than to Bosnia and Herzegovina. We also conclude that other circumstances may affect our conclusion, and therefore our findings cannot be considered definite. Keywords: EU, Turkey, Bosnia and Herzegovina, The Copenhagen criteria, democracy, rule of law, human rights, protection of minorities, enlargement.

Zugl.: Berlin, Humboldt-Univ., Diss., 2006

Zugl.: Tübingen, Univ., Diss., 2006