Dayton Agreement
The General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina, also known as the Dayton Agreement or the Dayton Accords, and colloquially known as the Dayton, is the peace agreement ending the three-and-a-half-year-long Bosnian War, an armed conflict part of the larger Yugoslav Wars. It was signed on 21 November 1995 in Dayton, Ohio, United States, at the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base. It was re-signed ceremonially in Paris, France on 14 December 1995.
The warring parties agreed to peace and to a single sovereign state known as Bosnia and Herzegovina composed of two parts: the largely Serb-populated Republika Srpska and mainly Croat-Bosniak-populated Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Bosnia and Herzegovina entered into the related arms control treaty, the Florence Agreement, in 1996 under the Accords. The Dayton followed the Washington Agreement, signed the year prior, in collective efforts to delineate the country's geography.
Praised for establishing lasting peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the Dayton Accords have also been criticized for creating an unduly complex political governance system in the country, as well as entrenching regional ethnic cleansing.
Negotiation and signature
Though basic elements of the Dayton Agreement were proposed in international talks as early as 1992, these negotiations were initiated following the unsuccessful previous peace efforts and arrangements, the August 1995 Croatian military Operation Storm and its aftermath, the government military offensive against the Republika Srpska, conducted in parallel with NATO's Operation Deliberate Force. During September and October 1995, world powers, gathered in the Contact Group, pressured the leaders of the three sides to attend settlement negotiations; Dayton, Ohio was eventually chosen as the venue.Talks began with an outline of key points presented by the US in a team led by National Security Adviser Anthony Lake in visits to London, Bonn, Paris and other European stops 10 – 14 August 1995. These included Sochi, to consult Russian Foreign Minister Andrei Kozyrev. Lake's team handed off to a separate US inter-agency group led by Assistant Secretary of State Richard Holbrooke, who went on to negotiate with Balkan leaders in their capitals. The Holbrooke crew conducted five rounds of intense shuttle diplomacy from August to October, including short conferences in Geneva and New York that resulted in the parties' adoption of principles for a settlement on 8 and 26 September respectively.
The Dayton conference took place from 1–21 November 1995. The main participants from the region were the President of the Republic of Serbia Slobodan Milošević, President of Croatia Franjo Tuđman, and President of Bosnia and Herzegovina Alija Izetbegović with his Foreign Minister Muhamed Šaćirbeg.
The peace conference was led by US Secretary of State Warren Christopher, and negotiator Richard Holbrooke with two co-chairmen in the form of EU Special Representative Carl Bildt and the First Deputy Foreign Minister of Russia Igor Ivanov. A key participant in the US delegation was General Wesley Clark. The head of the UK's team was Pauline Neville-Jones, political director of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. The UK military representative was Col Arundell David Leakey. Paul Williams, through the Public International Law & Policy Group served as legal counsel to the Bosnian Government delegation during the negotiations.
Holbrooke spoke of the "immense difficulty of engaging the Bosnian government in a serious negotiation".
The secure site was chosen in order to remove all the parties from their comfort zone, without which they would have little incentive to negotiate; to reduce their ability to negotiate through the media; and to securely house over 800 staff and attendants. Curbing the participants' ability to negotiate via the media was a particularly important consideration. Holbrooke wanted to prevent posturing through early leaks to the press.
After having been initialed in Dayton, Ohio, on 21 November 1995, the agreement was signed ceremonially in Paris on 14 December 1995 and witnessed by President of the European Council Felipe González, French President Jacques Chirac, US President Bill Clinton, UK Prime Minister John Major, German Chancellor Helmut Kohl and Russian Prime Minister Viktor Chernomyrdin.
Content
The agreement's main purpose is to promote peace and stability in Bosnia and Herzegovina and to endorse regional balance in and around the former Yugoslavia.The present political divisions of Bosnia and Herzegovina and its structure of government were agreed upon. A key component of this was the delineation of the Inter-Entity Boundary Line to which many of the tasks listed in the Annexes referred.
The State of Bosnia Herzegovina is composed of the Federation of Bosnia-Herzegovina and of the Republika Srpska. Bosnia and Herzegovina is a complete state, as opposed to a confederation; no entity or entities could ever be separated from Bosnia and Herzegovina unless by due legal process. Although highly decentralised in its entities, it would still retain a central government, with a rotating State Presidency, a central bank and a constitutional court.
The agreement mandated a wide range of international organizations to monitor, oversee and implement components of the agreement. The NATO-led IFOR was responsible for implementing military aspects of the agreement and deployed on 20 December 1995, taking over the forces of the UNPROFOR. The Office of the High Representative was charged with the task of civil implementation. The Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe was charged with organising the first free elections in 1996.
Constitutional Court decision
On 13 October 1997, the Croatian 1861 Law Party and the Bosnia-Herzegovina 1861 Law Party requested the Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina to annul several decisions and to confirm one decision of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina and, more importantly, to review the constitutionality of the General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina since it was alleged that the agreement violated the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina in a way that it undermined the integrity of the state and could cause the dissolution of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Court reached the conclusion that it is not competent to decide the dispute in regards to the mentioned decisions since the applicants were not subjects that were identified in Article VI.3 of the Constitution on those who can refer disputes to the Court. The Court also rejected the other request:It was one of the early cases in which the Court had to deal with the question of the legal nature of the Constitution. By making the remark in the manner of obiter dictum concerning the Annex IV and the rest of the peace agreement, the Court actually "established the ground for legal unity" of the entire peace agreement, which further implied that all of the annexes are in the hierarchical equality. In later decisions the Court confirmed that by using other annexes of the peace agreement as a direct base for the analysis, not only in the context of systematic interpretation of the Annex IV. However, since the Court rejected the presented request of the appellants, it did not go into details concerning the controversial questions of the legality of the process in which the new Constitution came to power and replaced the former Constitution of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The Court used the same reasoning to dismiss the similar claim in a later case.
Territorial changes
Before the agreement, Bosnian Serbs controlled about 46% of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bosniaks 28% and Bosnian Croats 25%.Bosnian Serbs got large tracts of mountainous territories back, but they had to surrender Sarajevo and some vital Eastern Bosnian/Herzegovian positions. Their percentage grew to 49%.
Bosniaks got most of Sarajevo and some important positions in eastern Bosnia and Herzegovina while they lost only a few locations on Mount Ozren and in western Bosnia. Their percentage grew to 30%, and they greatly improved the quality of the land. Large tracts of prewar Bosniak inhabited lands remained under Bosnian Serb control.
Bosnian Croats gave most back to the Bosnian Serbs and also retreated from Una-Sana Donji Vakuf afterward. A small enlargement of Posavina did not change the fact that after Dayton Bosnian Croats controlled just 21% of Bosnia and Herzegovina, compared to more than 25% prior to Dayton. One of the most important Bosnian Croat territories was left out of Bosnian Croat control.
Control of Republika Srpska
- About 89.5% was under control of Bosnian Serbs
- About 9% of today's territories of Republika Srpska was controlled by Bosnian Croat forces; mainly in municipalities of Šipovo, Petrovac, Istočni Drvar, Jezero, Kupres and part of Banja Luka municipality
- About 1.5% of today's territories of Republika Srpska was controlled by Bosniak forces, mainly some villages in Ozren, western Bosnia.
Control of Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina
- About 53% of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina was under Bosniak control.
- About 41% of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina was under the control of Bosnian Croats.
- About 6% was under control of Bosnian Serbs.
Cantons
- was almost completely under control of Bosnian Croats
- Bosniaks controlled some points east of Kupres
- was almost completely under control of Bosniaks
- Bosnian Croats controlled some mountain passes on the southern parts of Bosanski Petrovac and Bihać municipalities
- was completely under Bosnian Croat control
- was divided, more than half was under Bosnian Croat control
- northern and central parts were under Bosniak control
- eastern mountains were under Bosnian Serb control
- was divided, a bit more than a third was under Bosnian Croat control
- rest was under control of Bosniaks
- was largely under Bosniak control
- there were some small enclaves like Žepče, Usora under Bosnian Croat control
- eastern mountains were under Bosnian Serb control
- was largely under Bosniak control
- there were some villages in Gradačac municipality under Bosnian Croat control
- and some villages in Doboj and Gračanica municipalities under Bosnian Serb control
- was mostly under Bosnian Croat control
- Bosnian Serbs controlled Odžak and parts of Domaljevac municipalities
- was mostly under Bosniak control
- Bosnian Serbs controlled areas which linked it with Sarajevo
- was mostly under Bosnian Serbs control
- while Bosniaks controlled some southern suburbs and most of the city itself
- Bosniaks controlled most of its southern parts
- Bosnian Serbs its northern parts
- While Bosnian Croats controlled the rest, part near Orašje municipality and two enclaves on southern parts of municipality