Art Institutions and National Identity in a Post - Conflict Society
Post-conflict societies inhabit a prolonged identity crisis. This crisis defines the scenario in present day Bosnia and Herzegovina, where ethno-centric narratives embody the consciousness of the Bosniak, Croat, and Serb populations, inhibiting the prevalence of an overarching national identity. In this thesis, I contend that realizing a national identity, as defined by Benedict Anderson, is crucial to the reconciliation of a post-conflict country such as Bosnia. In light of the limitations of parliamentary structures (such as those defined by Bosnia’s Dayton Agreement) within a society affected by mass atrocity, I argue that art institutions are capable of negotiating the question of a national identity. Focusing on Bosnia, I have examined the nation’s representation in the Venice Biennale, the phenomenological significance of the Sarajevo Film Festival, and finally, the function of museums and public art within the nation. This has revealed how art institutions can address the past in order to memorialize and revisit significant events to realize a collective history, act as a soft body power, create new traditions and narratives, and act as a means for society to realize the distinctness of the nation. My research concludes that art institutions can certainly fulfill long-term and symbolic functions that governmental or legal bodies fail to effectively address, despite their limitations in regards to outreach, access, and the dubious assumption about the effects that they can have on a post-conflict society. This ultimately reiterates the importance of art to the political imagination, not just in Bosnia, but also in other post-conflict societies.
Nationalism and the Rule of Law: Lessons from the Balkans and Beyond
The relationship between nationalism and the rule of law has been largely neglected by scholars despite the fact that separately, they have often captured public discourse and have emerged as critical concepts for the social sciences. This book provides the first systematic account of this relationship. The main focus of the book is to develop an analytical framework for understanding the interactions of nationalism and the rule of law by focusing on the domains of citizenship, transitional justice, and international justice. The book engages these insights further in a detailed empirical analysis of three case studies from the former Yugoslavia. The author argues that while the tensions and contradictions between nationalism and the rule of law have become more apparent in the post–Cold War era, they can also be harnessed for productive purposes. In exploring the role of law in managing and transforming nationalism, the book emphasizes the deliberative character of legal processes and offers an original perspective on the power of international law to reshape public discourse, politics, and legal orders.
A case for Slovene nationalism: initial citizenship rules and the erasure*
. When Slovenia became a sovereign state in 1991, it had to define who its citizens were. Were all residents of Slovenia, regardless of their ethnic belonging, equal in this respect? This article provides an answer to this question by elucidating certain parts of the secession legislation – the initial designation of citizenry and one of its indirect outcomes, the erasure from the register of permanent residents. The ethnic/civic dichotomy will be applied in order to demonstrate opposing nationalist claims made by the ruling elite. In terms of specific processes, Slovene nationalism will be presented in three distinct phases: counter-state nationalism (before the break-up of Yugoslavia), state-building nationalism (the initial designation of citizenry), and the nationalising state (after the secession; marked by the erasure and threats to revoke citizenship statuses of naturalised citizens).