Bosnian War Dayton Agreement

The court used the same reasoning to dismiss the similar motion in a later case. [10] Twenty-four years after the end of the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina by the Dayton Peace Agreement, the agreement is considered an “expired peace agreement” in the country. This is surprising, given the history. In post-war Yugoslavia, Serbs felt increasingly marginalized and deprived of their national rights. This sense of victimization contributed to the violent collapse of the former Yugoslavia. In March 1992, Bosniaks and Croats overwhelmingly approved independence in a referendum boycotted by serbs. The war followed. Of the pre-war population of 4.37 million, about 110,000 former Yugoslavs were killed and another 2.2 million were driven from their homes, often explicitly in the name of “ethnic cleansing.” The Court concluded that it did not have jurisdiction to rule on the dispute with regard to the abovementioned decisions, since the applicants were not subjects referred to in Article VI(3)(a) of the Constitution concerning persons who may bring disputes before the Court of Justice. The court also rejected the other request: they mocked another dispute with Dirty Dick – US chief negotiator Richard Holbrooke – to put on the flags and chairs in a row and restore something of the Euro-honor. The 21 days of negotiations in Dayton may have secured a Bosnian peace agreement, but they opened up a big gap between the United States and the Europeans in the contact group. [173] Schedule 6, Chapter 1, Section I.

Comments are closed.