"Ethnicizing" the EU's Involvement in Post-conflict Societies: The Case of Ontological Insecurity in Republika Srpska/AB'nin Catisma Sonrasi Toplumlardaki Mudahalesinin "Etniklestirilmesi": Sirp Cumhuriyeti'nde Ontolojik Guvensizlik Ornegi.

• Author: Kocan, Faris

Introduction (*)

Ethnic conflicts, which cause multiple forms of violence, often perpetuate security concerns long after large-scale armed violence ceases. An important part of such security concerns in post-conflict societies is the 'need' for preserving distinct (ethnic) identities. (1) Such concerns inform well the ontological security theory (OST), which highlights how both individuals and groups seek the stability and continuity of their self-narratives. (2) One of the (un)intended outcomes of seeking stability and continuity of one's own self-narrative in post-conflict societies is continuing to imagine the Other, often in an antagonistic manner. This in turn limits (peace) efforts of actors that aim to bring the collectives previously involved in armed conflict closer to each other in post-conflict societies. (3) One of the most important actors involved in such post-conflict stabilization efforts on the European periphery is the European Union (EU). The latter, by offering the prospect of European integration, is often understood as providing the means and/or grounds for overcoming antagonisms through the transformation of narrowly-defined identities (ethnic, religious, cultural etc.) and thereby transcending the primordial "Self-Other" dialectics. (4)

However, this is not always the case. The majority of ethnic conflicts are 'trapped' in narratives and (mis)conceptions of Self and the Other, and one of the reasons for this is because they are premised on ontological asymmetry. (5) This means that "ethnic conflicts usually occur between onto-logically more secure majority collectives and less secure minority ethnic groups", (6) demonstrating the political, economic, and social asymmetry between them. Yet, there are cases where ethnic conflict is not premised on ontological asymmetry per se but is still discursively constructed by the political elite as such, for the purpose of managing ontological insecurity. An example of this is, as we argue in this paper, Republika Srpska (RS), a Bosnian Serb-dominated political entity in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), where the political elite managed to construct the sense of ontological asymmetry between RS and (Federation of) BiH amidst the EU's involvement in this country, even though both entities (i.e., RS and Federation of BiH) are equal under the BiH constitution. In other words, the EU's involvement in BiH that aims at de-intensifying the antagonisms among the peoples of BiH was 'ethnicized' and framed within the Bosnian Serb political elite discourse as serving the Bosniak majority (50.1%), thus generating ontological asymmetry between the Bosnian Serbs (30.8%) and Bosniaks. This is epitomized in secessionist impulses by Milorad Dodik, the most prominent Bosnian Serb political figure who has held various political functions since 2006. This article thus contributes to the literature on ontological (in)security and conflict resolution, (7) by furthering, in an empirical manner, the research agenda on how actors involved in post-conflict environments can construct an ontological asymmetry between themselves and other ethnic groups, and even fuel secessionism as the only possible means to attain ontological security.

The EU's involvement in post-conflict BiH serves as a noteworthy case to demonstrate the above-outlined dynamics. Since 2005, when BiH started negotiations with the EU on signing the Stabilization and Association Agreement (SAA), the secessionist impulses by the political elites in RS started to trouble the socio-political environment of BiH. (8) The SAA, which marks an important step for the country toward full EU membership, somehow managed to generate the sense of ontological insecurity on part of RS and further burdened the already challenging ethnic identity narratives in BiH. Soon after BiH signed the SAA (2007), the EU engaged in another initiative, namely the Butmir Process (2009), which aimed to push for constitutional reforms in BiH. Yet again, the Butmir Process, which aimed at making BiH more 'functional' and 'stable' as a state, only consolidated the ethnopolitical identity narrative in RS. This was further reinforced during the 2015-2016 campaign for the unconstitutional referendum on the 'Day of RS' (9) and Milorad Dodik's decision to unilaterally withdraw RS from central (BiH's) institutions in 2021, contributing to one of the biggest political crises since the end of the Bosnian war. (10)

In all those cases, the EU failed to stem the escalating ethnopolitical rhetoric in RS, thus proving itself incapable of functioning as an agent of peace in BiH. (11) The EU's efforts to push for constitutional reforms that would develop the political capabilities of BiH as a state failed to de-intensify the antagonisms between the peoples of BiH. The SAA and the Butmir Process, which entailed cutting back certain political powers of RS (as well as those of the Federation of BiH) to the advantage of BiH as a state, challenged the existing narratives and Self-Other dialectics in RS. Both EU-driven reform initiatives in turn generated ontological insecurity on part of the ethnopolitical elites in RS, who saw a political gain (i.e., maintaining the status quo) in framing the EU's agency in BiH as serving the Bosniak cause. Thereby, the SAA and the Butmir Process accelerated the return to conflict identity narratives that persist until today.

In order to demonstrate how the EU's efforts were framed as serving the Bosnian Serb cause, and thus discursively became part and parcel of an ontological asymmetry between the Bosnian Serbs and Bosniaks in Bosnian Serb ethnopolitical narratives, we analyzed news articles published in media outlets of RS covering the SAA (2005-2007) and Butmir Process (2009-2010) at these two critical junctures. We scrutinized four media outlets in RS, namely: Radio Television RS (RTRS), Radio Television Bijeljina (RTV BN), Glas Srpske and Nezavisne novine, which are among the most widely read media outlets in RS. (12) The analysis of news articles covered: i) 1,769 units in the period between 2005 and 2007; ii) 1,267 units in the period between 2009 and 2010. However, we have only analyzed those news articles that directly mentioned the SAA and Butmir Process (SAA - 3.4% (N=60); Butmir Process - 2.7% (N=34)). By doing this, we offer a detailed empirical analysis of the two most important EU-driven initiatives in post-conflict BiH which allow us to understand the specific construction of (dominant) narratives that served as means to reinstate the ontological security of RS.

The paper is divided as follows. The first section outlines the literature on ontological security and conflict resolution by highlighting the role of ontological asymmetry in ethnic conflicts. The second section briefly introduces the EU involvement in post-conflict BiH with an emphasis on RS from an ontological security perspective. The empirical part is based on an analysis of media articles covering negotiations to sign the SAA and the Butmir Process, highlighting the dominant narratives that generate ontological asymmetry between Bosniak and Bosnian Serb collectives in Bosnian Serb narratives, and in turn prevent the de-intensification of antagonisms between them. The conclusion unravels the theoretical and policy implications of this study, and outlines avenues for future research.

Ontologica! (In)security, Conflict Resolution and Ontological Asymmetry

Although the theory of ontological security (OST) originated in the field of psychology (13) and later moved to sociology, (14) its application to the field of International Relations is rather recent. What OST offers in theoretical terms is the introduction of the concept of basic trust that is based on 'hope' and 'courage to be', with the aim of understanding the relationship between security and (self-)identity. (15) Thus, while OST is focused on security of Self (being), other security concepts build on the logic of security as survival (physical security). At its most basic, we could say that OST is defined as "the security of existence, a sense of courage and trust in the world as it is through the basic trust in own biographical continuity". (16) Ontological security is positive security, which agents strive for, because it is first and foremost a sense of security that derives from being aware ofwho we were in the past, who we are now, and who we would like to be in the future. This security is attained and maintained through the routinization of everyday life, to which actors' resort, to manage their fundamental anxieties (17). If such routinization that manages fundamental anxieties is ruptured, ontological insecurity occurs. It occurs because it generates existential anxieties that in turn force individuals (and societies) to again expose themselves to the existential questions that were bracketed away.

In essence, one could argue that OST is premised on the idea that security derives from the maintenance of narratives and practices, no matter how antagonistic they are. But when they are antagonistic, they tend to more inherently suppress existential anxieties by "establishing definite objects of fear, producing systems of meaning that clearly differentiate friends from enemies". (18) This premise has enabled scholars, such as Bar-Tal (19) and Rumelili, (20) to link OST with the literature on conflict resolution, via the claim that individuals and societies - through time - develop some forms of attachment to conflict-supporting narratives. When such conflict-supporting or antagonistic identity narratives are undermined, they tend to generate ontological insecurity. Furthermore, as Rumelili and Celik (21) and Loizides (22) showed, when ontological insecurity occurs, it opens up space for political actors to shape identity narratives according to their political interests. Such shaping is possible because the general state of uncertainty that derives from ontological insecurity...