Table Of ContentCitizens of an Empty Nation
THEETHNOGRAPHYOFPOLITICALVIOLENCE
TobiasKelly,SeriesEditor
Acompletelistofbooksintheseriesisavailablefromthepublisher.
Citizens of an Empty Nation
Youth and State-Making in Postwar Bosnia-Herzegovina
Azra Hromadžić
UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA PRESS
PHILADELPHIA
Copyright(cid:2)2015UniversityofPennsylvaniaPress
Allrightsreserved.Exceptforbriefquotationsusedforpurposesofrevieworscholarly
citation,noneofthisbookmaybereproducedinanyformbyanymeanswithout
writtenpermissionfromthepublisher.
Publishedby
UniversityofPennsylvaniaPress
Philadelphia,Pennsylvania19104-4112
www.upenn.edu/pennpress
PrintedintheUnitedStatesofAmerica
onacid-freepaper
10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1
LibraryofCongressCataloging-in-PublicationData
ISBN978-0-8122-4700-8
C o n t e n t s
Introduction 1
PartI.IntegratingtheSchool
1.RighttoDifference 29
2.CartographyofPeace-Building 63
3.BathroomMixing 86
PartII.DisintegratingtheNation
4.PoeticsofNationhood 105
5.InvisibleCitizens 139
6.Anti-Citizens 156
Conclusion 181
Epilogue.EmptyNation,EmptyBellies 188
vi Contents
Notes 193
Bibliography 211
Index 225
Acknowledgments 237
Introduction
OnJuly23,2004,elevenyearsafterthedestructionofthefamedOldBridge
inMostar,Bosnia-Herzegovina,1andafteradecadeofpainstakinginterna-
tional diplomatic efforts and more than thirteen million U.S. dollars
investedinthereconstruction,2thenew‘‘Old’’Bridgewas reopenedtothe
public. Together with thousands of ‘‘internationals’’ and ‘‘locals,’’ I wit-
nessedtheopeningceremony.Numerousspeechesweregivenbykeyinter-
nationalandlocalleaderswhospokeaboutthesignificanceoftheeventfor
the city’s divided people and the country’s future. Popular singers and
actorsgaveinspiringspeechesandsangpatrioticsongs.Boatspassedunder
the bridge, and celebrated divers leaped into their river from the rebuilt
bridge. After several hours of emotionally charged entertainment, children
fromthetwodividedsidesofthecity,theBosniak/eastsideandCroat/west
side,metinthemiddleofthebridge.Thismoving‘‘bridging’’actofficially
openedthebridgetothepublic.
While absorbing the excitement, I followed the crowds and carefully
crossed thenew bridge packedwith people. Then I returned tothe streets.
They were crammed with people celebrating, drinking, eating, or simply
walking around, wanting to take part in the event. Without thinking, I
foundmyselfcrossingthemainboulevard,theonetimefrontlineofbattle,
and walking over to the Croat west side of the divided city. I was stunned
by the contrast between the two sides: there were no crowds on these
streets;therewasnocelebration;itwasbusinessasusual.Someyouthwere
sitting in bars, ignoring the lights and noise coming from the other side. I
felt confused—how is the rebuilding of the bridge a symbol of national
reconciliationifthemajorityofCroatsinMostardonotevenacknowledge
itsrebirth?
In the weeks following the opening ceremony, I scrupulously investi-
gatedthosetensions.AsIwasgrapplingwiththe competingmeaningsand
2 Introduction
emotionssurroundingthe reconstructionofthe OldBridge,Irealizedthat
its restoration could not fulfill the international and local expectations of
national reconciliationsince the bridge’s former symbolism didnot match
the postwar social and political context. What is more, another postwar
initiativeanddifferenttypeof‘‘bridge-building’’wassimultaneouslytaking
place, powerfully reflecting and encapsulating the concerns of ordinary
Mostarians.Challengingnegotiationsaboutthereintegrationofthefamous
high school in town, the Mostar Gymnasium, were occurring in the shad-
owsofthenewbridge;theyincludedmultiplelocalandinternationalactors
andgroups.Mycuriositywasimmediatelystimulated:whatwasgivingsub-
stance to these contested processes and events of intervention and reinte-
gration? How were they perceived and experienced, fabricated and
contestedbytheactorsinvolvedandthegeneralpublic?Thisinitialcurios-
ity would mark the beginning of my long-term research at the school,
where I ethnographically captured the complex processes that are at the
heart of this book: the effects of postwar international state-making inter-
ventionson‘‘ordinarypeople,’’3especiallyyouth.
My fascination with the Mostar Gymnasium was amplified by my own
experiences of war-interrupted schooling. During the war (1992–95),
togetherwithmyfamilyandpeopleofBihac´—anorthwesternBosniantown
ontheborderwithCroatia—Ispentthreeandahalfyearsundersiege,with
noelectricityorregularfoodsupplies.Priortothewar,myclassmateswere
youth of all ethnoreligious backgrounds; Bosnia’s Serbs, Croats, Bosniaks
(Bosnian Muslims), and otherscoexisted peacefullyin my town and in my
classroom. After several months of increasing rumors and reports about
violence elsewhere in the country, in early May 1992, I came to school to
findmanystudents’desksempty—almostallSerbstudentsweregonefrom
their desks as well as from our town, including Natasˇa, one of my best
friends. Some of my classmates and teachers left Bosnia-Herzegovina alto-
gether, while others moved to the Serb-dominated part of the country,
including the surrounding hills. Literally overnight, they became the ‘‘ene-
mies’’ who would bomb our hometown for the next three years. Their
empty desks provoked rumors, sadness, confusion, anger, and anxiety
among those of us who remained. This palpable classroom emptiness—a
reflection of my town becoming rapidly ‘‘overcome by nationhood and
nationalism’’ (see Brubaker 1994; Drakulic´ 1993)—and the related, hasty
transformation ofa classmate into ‘‘an enemy’’profoundly shaped my life,
includingthecourseofmyacademiccareer.Thisethnographyisthusdeeply
Introduction 3
informed by my experiences of going to school in the Balkans during the
1990s,thetimesofwarandpeace.
Myexperienceofthehalf-emptyclassroomisanillustrativeexampleof
how schools in (post)war regions become places where intimate relation-
ships, friendships, and connections powerfully converge with some of the
major instruments used by local and international political actors to man-
age, impose, compose, solidify, fragment, legitimize, and promote certain
goals(Mosse2005;Latour2000),includingtheimplementationofpostcon-
flict reconstruction projects.4 Therefore, it should not come as a surprise
thatfortheinternationalpoliticalactorsandlocalpoliticalelitesinpostwar
Bosnia-Herzegovina,schoolsandyouthbecameaprolificsiteforimagining
(ethno)nationalidentitiesandwereprioritizedasmeanstounifyordispute
the postwar state.At the sametime, schoolsemerged asa powerfulterrain
for demonstrating war-produced political and social divergences and
collisions.
As a result of these larger and uninformed processes, and the unique
symbolic and geographical place of the Mostar Gymnasium, the school
instantaneously felt like a perfect academic and personal fit, allowing for
an intense ethnographic and anthropological engagement as well as a
profound personal reflection, challenge, and growth. The school, popu-
larly known as Stara Gimnazija (the Old Gymnasium), has a unique place
in Bosnia-Herzegovina, past and present. Built in 1898 in the Austro-
Hungarian orientalist, Moorish revival style, it is a historical institution
and national monument. It was one of the most famous and academically
prestigious educational institutions in the former Yugoslavia, and among
the best in Bosnia-Herzegovina. Due to its academic rigor and popularity,
the school attracted more privileged and high-achieving youth. Many of
the school’s students later became famous young revolutionaries, freedom
fighters, world-famous artists, academics, and scientists. Given its illustri-
oushistory—andthefactthatsomeonefromalmosteveryfamilyinMostar
hasattendedthis school—alotofemotionsurfacesinconversationsabout
theschoolanditsfuture.
Theschool’simportanceandsymbolismareenhancedbyitslocationin
the very center of Mostar, on the Croat west side of the main boulevard,
which currently divides the city. In prewar Mostar, the boulevard was the
center of economic and social life. At the time of my research, however, it
was an eerie, empty strip of land, drained of much of its former life and
content, ‘‘a twilight border zone of hostile and uneasy separation between
4 Introduction
Figure1.StaraGimnazija,summer2005.Photobytheauthor.
the two halves of the divided city’’ (Wimmen 2004:3). This ‘‘no-man’s-
land,’’withitsghostly remainsofbrutalviolence,wasincompleteopposi-
tiontoitsformercentralplaceinthelifeofMostar.
Given this illustrious history and geography, and the school’s impor-
tanceinthecontemporarypoliticsandprojectsofpeace-buildingandstate-
making in Bosnia-Herzegovina, the Mostar Gymnasium replaced the Old
Bridge as the most potent icon of the postwar peace-building and state-
making project, and of the social (re)organization in the segregated city.
While the new ‘‘Old’’ Bridge physically replaced the destroyed Old Bridge,
it could not retain its former symbolism. The political project of ‘‘socialist
humanism’’(see,amongothers,Cohenand Markovic´ 1975;Horvat1982),
which invested the Old Bridge with a unique idea of Yugoslav coexistence
and Bosnian multiculturalism, was shattered with the destruction of the
state and its Old Bridge. As a result, the new ‘‘Old’’ Bridge stretches today
