The Three-Headed Dragon

One would be hard-pressed to come across many over the age of 30 in this city who are not nostalgic for the times of Josip Broz Tito, the pragmatically socialist dictator of Yugoslavia who managed to keep nationalist sentiments at bay (generally locked away in political prisons) and keep the country out of the Soviet grasp.

When he died, war and democracy were natural transitions. There would be no room for dictators, however benevolent, in a democratic Europe.

Today, many of these people are indeed wondering why democracy is better than dictatorship. And the right to vote has not been as rewarding as it was supposed to be.

When a Bosnian does not wish to claim one of the three ethno-nationalisms or religions on offer here, he or she sometimes says “I’m Tito’s child.” What does this mean, exactly? It means that they are first and foremost Yugoslav, not Bosniak, Bosnian Croat or Bosnian Serb; not Muslim, Catholic or Orthodox.

In Sarajevo, these ‘children of Tito’ might tend to vote moderate and non-nationalist, but outside the capital, voting is conducted along ethnic lines, based on false fears and false promises, sidelining the Sarajevo ballots. The right to vote comes down to the right for the urban, educated voter to give way to the undereducated rural voter, the latter being more vulnerable to fear-mongering and empty financial and development promises.

Indeed, a colleague from Macedonia who recently visited Sarajevo said she was “amazed to see how many people so often talk about socialism and Tito and Yugoslavia. You don’t have that here [in Macedonia].”

She also recalled an interesting and telling conversation she had with a taxi driver about democracy in Bosnia. Democracy, he said, was for “civilized people, not for us,” and he recommended a return to the time of Tito. “Tito knew the way: Hit ‘em hard and keep ‘em disciplined.”

The problem with democracy here is that it gives control to a majority that is not prepared or experienced enough to responsibly exercise its power. The result is that the ‘masses’ continue to vote for nationalist parties who have clearly demonstrated their unwillingness to undertake any reforms that could be unpopular among their supporters. And as long as they intensify the ethno-nationalist rhetoric ahead of each election, a healthy majority of voters allow their unfounded fears to cloud their judgment and overlook the fact that these parties have failed to make good on any of their promises. ‘Tito’s children’ become increasingly disillusioned with the voting process, and learn to view their ballot as irrelevant.

What democracy in Bosnia means today is that the country does not have one dictator, rather three presidents (sarcastically referred to by some as the 'three-headed dragon') and, for all intents and purposes, a triple-engorged bureaucracy that it cannot afford and which barely manages to function. The only thing it lacks is a fourth president to represent the unrepresented ‘Tito’s children.’

Any decision before parliament (unless it’s whether to ensure baklava is on the parliamentary cafeteria menu) is rendered to political purgatory, where it will remain unless the international community intervenes. And arguably, Bosnia’s democracy is a farce, as the country is run by the international community, which in turn, though this is generally not meant to be voiced out loud, largely takes its orders from the US Embassy.

Democracy in Bosnia means that the country can have no clear foreign policy because of its ever-fighting ethno-nationalist parties; that the country can make no progress towards the EU, lacking the ability to pass and implement necessary reforms; and that moderate reformists remain sidelined.

So, yes, democracy has given power to the people here, but to the wrong people. And, well, let’s just say it: At this point, Tito doesn’t look so bad.