'Father of Dayton' on another official trip

(Patria) - Legal expert Sifet Kukuruz commented on the announced visit of James O'Brien, Assistant to US Secretary of State Antony Blinken, to Bosnia and Herzegovina.

O'Brien, known in the BiH public as the "father of the Dayton Peace Agreement", will be in our country from February 1 to 3, and we are publishing Kukuruz's status on social networks in its entirety.

Although not a crime in itself, the Dayton Agreement is the result of a crime. As a direct result of a crime, its existence as a regulator of social life represents a crime from the perspective of the values, principles, and tenets of liberal democracy.

The announced arrival in BiH of a person considered the "father of Dayton" is noteworthy. However, this visit cannot be a basis for any real optimism.

Because, if the father was willing to watch the failure of the work of his hands with folded arms and closed eyes for 30 years, then one cannot expect him to change anything qualitatively in his approach today.

He will not, and it is unlikely he can, because the forces from the pre-Dayton era have managed to consolidate and strengthen themselves over the past 30 years, thanks to Dayton. And they have strengthened to such an extent that they do not hide their intention to return to the lines and positions they held at the time of the signing of Dayton.

One should not harbor illusions that these forces will return to pre-Dayton positions unless the representatives of the US and EU, through so-called constitutional and legislative reforms, deliver what they want. And they want what they failed to achieve in full through military aggression.

They did not succeed, but they never gave up on those goals!

This is confirmed by the armament of neighboring countries and the simultaneous weakening of BiH's defense capabilities, despite the fact that such a development directly negates and violates the principle of regional stability established by Dayton itself.

And the "father of Dayton" tolerates such a violation of Dayton!

How much of a "constructive solution" Dayton is, is perhaps best confirmed by the fact that the Dayton Agreement itself has enabled the strengthening of destructive forces and processes and the weakening of state-building forces over the past 30 years.

This in itself is a sufficiently credible proof that something must change in the "Dayton solution" itself, because its application continues to generate and empower destructive forces.

Every solution must be evaluated based on the results it yields, and the result of Dayton is less and less of the state of BiH and the constant strengthening of anti-state forces.

The announced arrival of James O'Brien in BiH is understood by some as the arrival of the chief ideologue of the Dayton Agreement, who allegedly finally brought peace to BiH.

It has become clear to everyone that this claim is not supported by reality. Dayton peace is increasingly manifesting itself only as a Bosnian armistice!

The arrival of James O'Brien in BiH should be used for a serious discussion about the weaknesses of the Dayton Agreement, which seriously threaten to return BiH to its pre-Dayton state.

Given that James O'Brien is considered the "father of Dayton", this visit is an ideal opportunity for the father to confront the ill-behaved, uncouth, and spoiled child who has been creating serious problems for the citizens of BiH for 30 years.

The citizens of BiH are forced to start thinking whether the irresponsible behavior of the "Dayton children" is a direct result of the serious neglect of their behavior by the "father of Dayton".

Despite everything that has happened in the past 30 years, the citizens of BiH, in their naivety and political immaturity, continue to not change the course of their expectations from the US (and EU), but the big question, especially in the context of numerous initiatives for amendments to the BiH Constitution and the BiH Election Law, is whether the US and EU have changed their course regarding BiH.

Such a possibility, especially in the context of the behavior of numerous American and European mediators, is not excluded. Moreover, it is becoming increasingly likely!

James O'Brien should be reminded that the main intention of the Dayton Agreement, besides stopping the war (one should not exclude ensuring Bill Clinton's victory in the US presidential elections), which was later legally confirmed as classic aggression, was the abolition of the concept of constituent peoples.

The abolition of the concept of constituent peoples would lead to the reconstruction of the multi-ethnic Bosnian society and the return to the concept of civic democracy.

The European Court of Human Rights, in its numerous judgments, constantly points to this most important aspect of Dayton, emphasizing that the main negotiators in Dayton were aware that the concept of constituent peoples is contrary to the idea of human rights and freedoms. However, they reluctantly agreed to this concept, but exclusively as a temporary solution.

James O'Brien should publicly announce why a Copernican turn is being made in the policy of the US and EU towards BiH, by trying to transform what is temporary into something permanent?

Why is the result of a crime being presented as a permanent solution and the basis for the future functioning of the state of BiH?

Why, when it has been shown for 30 years that Dayton can be and is only a basis for the dysfunctionality and gradual decay of the state of BiH?

Why is the result of a crime being presented as a permanent solution and the basis for the future functioning of the state of BiH?

Why, when it has been shown for 30 years that Dayton can be and is only a basis for the dysfunctionality and gradual decay of the state of BiH?

Dayton was not the cause of the problems at the time of its creation; it was their direct consequence.

However, today, 30 years later, it is becoming clear that the Dayton Agreement itself is the problem, because its "solutions" strongly enable not only the survival but also the strengthening of the true cause of the problems.

As a constitutional mechanism for the gradual overcoming of the concept of constituent peoples, the BiH Constitution itself provided for the supremacy of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms over all other constitutional norms.

However, the approach of numerous American and European mediators to BiH after Dayton indicates that there is simply no "post-Dayton" situation, but that Dayton is being imposed and promoted as a permanent solution.

And such an approach will be enforced until the state-building forces are exhausted.

BiH's path to the European Union is proving to be a path to Dayton, not to Brussels, because the so-called structural reforms initiated and implemented under the auspices of the US and EU are actually leading to the preservation of the Dayton structure.

James O'Brien should explain to the citizens of BiH whether and for what reasons the US has abandoned the idea of a civic BiH, which was enshrined in the BiH Constitution as an idea?

Why are the US, along with its European partners, leading BiH into a pre-Dayton state or, at best, keeping BiH trapped in Dayton solutions that are not solutions but shackles of slavery?

Instead of necessary legal dynamics, BiH is offered legal statics that lead to its gradual disappearance, because Dayton's statics are actually proving to be dynamics and strengthening of anti-state forces.

Also, James O'Brien should clarify to the domestic public whether the intention of Dayton is truly the establishment of BiH as a civic state or, rather, the construction of the state of BiH as an ethnic community, as a condominium of neighboring states?

In particular, he should explain to the citizens of BiH why constitutional and legislative reforms, under the supervision of American and European envoys, are moving in the direction of strengthening the ethnic, rather than the civic, principle?

Why are the US abandoning the course they demonstrated in Dayton, which is that constituent peoples are only a temporary category, a transitional state, and are not and cannot be a solution?

Why are the US changing their political course after Dayton and, instead of abolishing, are moving, sometimes faster, sometimes slower, towards preserving the concept of constituent peoples?

Much suggests the claim that the US and EU are deliberately keeping Bosnia and Herzegovina in a state of Dayton solutions. This situation will last as long as it takes to appear logical and natural.

Confirmation of this can be found in the fact that the US and EU, in their supposed search for a Bosnian solution, constantly go hand in hand with the "Bosnian problem". And that problem is the Greater-state and hegemonic-colonial policies of neighboring countries, which were the main cause of the Bosnian problem.

The condition for solving any problem is the isolation and removal of the cause of the problem, and the US and EU not only do not isolate this cause but constantly maintain it in a state of deep involvement in all processes in BiH and try to ensure its legitimacy through its presence.

It is impossible not to ask why states that committed aggression against BiH are allowed to decide on BiH's internal affairs?

The past 30 years have shown that a solution cannot be reached if the cause of the problem is presented and offered as the decisive factor for the solution, and such an approach to BiH in American and European policy simply cannot be overlooked.

If the cause of the problem is offered as a solution, it is necessary to ask what is meant by that "solution"?

Is the solution ensuring and protecting the interests of neighboring countries, or is it preserving the interests of BiH? It is important to know that one excludes the other!

Instead of categorically prohibiting the interference of Serbia and Croatia, as states that committed aggression against BiH, in BiH's internal affairs, the US and EU offer the involvement of neighboring states as a solution for BiH. And everyone knows well what the outcome of the involvement of neighboring states in BiH's internal affairs was.

How it is possible to present the interests of neighboring countries as the interests of BiH remains clear only to those who advocate for such a solution.

Therefore, the US and EU are trying to convince us that it is possible to make progress in the development of BiH with the involvement of forces that have been and remain strongly focused on the disintegration of the state of BiH.

The fact that neighboring countries committed aggression against BiH may not have been known to James O'Brien in 1995, but it is well known to the whole world today. And this undeniable fact obliges politically, legally, and morally.

It is high time that James O'Brien, during his visit to BiH, offers solutions for the abolition of Dayton as a result of aggression, genocide, and other crimes, because building a future on crime is simply not possible.

Crime can only be a basis for responsibility, not a basis for the organization of the state of BiH.

Let's burn illusions before they prove to be the main cause of our own downfall and the destruction of the state of BiH.

The citizens of BiH know that the "father of Dayton" is once again on an official trip, but they can only guess the nature and goals of that service. And those suspicions are not good at all.

Dayton was not the cause of the problems at the time of its creation; it was their direct consequence.

However, today, 30 years later, it is becoming clear that the Dayton Agreement itself is the problem, because its "solutions" strongly enable not only the survival but also the strengthening of the true cause of the problems.

As a constitutional mechanism for the gradual overcoming of the concept of constituent peoples, the BiH Constitution itself provided for the supremacy of the European Convention on Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms over all other constitutional norms.

However, the approach of numerous American and European mediators to BiH after Dayton indicates that there is simply no "post-Dayton" situation, but that Dayton is being imposed and promoted as a permanent solution.

And such an approach will be enforced until the state-building forces are exhausted.

BiH's path to the European Union is proving to be a path to Dayton, not to Brussels, because the so-called structural reforms initiated and implemented under the auspices of the US and EU are actually leading to the preservation of the Dayton structure.

James O'Brien should explain to the citizens of BiH whether and for what reasons the US has abandoned the idea of a civic BiH, which was enshrined in the BiH Constitution as an idea?

Why are the US, along with its European partners, leading BiH into a pre-Dayton state or, at best, keeping BiH trapped in Dayton solutions that are not solutions but shackles of slavery?

Instead of necessary legal dynamics, BiH is offered legal statics that lead to its gradual disappearance, because Dayton's statics are actually proving to be dynamics and strengthening of anti-state forces.

Also, James O'Brien should clarify to the domestic public whether the intention of Dayton is truly the establishment of BiH as a civic state or, rather, the construction of the state of BiH as an ethnic community, as a condominium of neighboring states?

In particular, he should explain to the citizens of BiH why constitutional and legislative reforms, under the supervision of American and European envoys, are moving in the direction of strengthening the ethnic, rather than the civic, principle?

Why are the US abandoning the course they demonstrated in Dayton, which is that constituent peoples are only a temporary category, a transitional state, and are not and cannot be a solution?

Why are the US changing their political course after Dayton and, instead of abolishing, are moving, sometimes faster, sometimes slower, towards preserving the concept of constituent peoples?

Much suggests the claim that the US and EU are deliberately keeping Bosnia and Herzegovina in a state of Dayton solutions. This situation will last as long as it takes to appear logical and natural.

Confirmation of this can be found in the fact that the US and EU, in their supposed search for a Bosnian solution, constantly go hand in hand with the "Bosnian problem". And that problem is the Greater-state and hegemonic-colonial policies of neighboring countries, which were the main cause of the Bosnian problem.

The condition for solving any problem is the isolation and removal of the cause of the problem, and the US and EU not only do not isolate this cause but constantly maintain it in a state of deep involvement in all processes in BiH and try to ensure its legitimacy through its presence.

It is impossible not to ask why states that committed aggression against BiH are allowed to decide on BiH's internal affairs?

The past 30 years have shown that a solution cannot be reached if the cause of the problem is presented and offered as the decisive factor for the solution, and such an approach to BiH in American and European policy simply cannot be overlooked.

If the cause of the problem is offered as a solution, it is necessary to ask what is meant by that "solution"?

Is the solution ensuring and protecting the interests of neighboring countries, or is it preserving the interests of BiH? It is important to know that one excludes the other!

Instead of categorically prohibiting the interference of Serbia and Croatia, as states that committed aggression against BiH, in BiH's internal affairs, the US and EU offer the involvement of neighboring states as a solution for BiH. And everyone knows well what the outcome of the involvement of neighboring states in BiH's internal affairs was.

How it is possible to present the interests of neighboring countries as the interests of BiH remains clear only to those who advocate for such a solution.

Therefore, the US and EU are trying to convince us that it is possible to make progress in the development of BiH with the involvement of forces that have been and remain strongly focused on the disintegration of the state of BiH.

The fact that neighboring countries committed aggression against BiH may not have been known to James O'Brien in 1995, but it is well known to the whole world today. And this undeniable fact obliges politically, legally, and morally.

It is high time that James O'Brien, during his visit to BiH, offers solutions for the abolition of Dayton as a result of aggression, genocide, and other crimes, because building a future on crime is simply not possible.

Crime can only be a basis for responsibility, not a basis for the organization of the state of BiH.

Let's burn illusions before they prove to be the main cause of our own downfall and the destruction of the state of BiH.

The citizens of BiH know that the "father of Dayton" is once again on an official trip, but they can only guess the nature and goals of that service. And those suspicions are not good at all.