US-led talks at Dayton ended the war by dividing power along ethnic lines. They stopped the killing but left a divided and weak state.
In November 1995 US envoy Richard Holbrooke brought Izetbegovic, Milosevic and Tudjman to an air base in Dayton, Ohio. Milosevic negotiated for the Bosnian Serbs.
The Dayton Agreement was signed in Paris in December 1995. It kept Bosnia as one state with two parts: the Bosniak-Croat Federation (51 per cent of the land) and the Serb Republic (49 per cent).
The central government was weak. A three-member presidency, one from each group, shared power. An international High Representative oversaw the peace, and a NATO force of 60,000 troops (IFOR) replaced UNPROFOR.
Dayton worked because the conditions were right. The sides were exhausted and the military map had shifted. NATO had shown it would use force, and the USA put its full weight behind the deal.
Its limits were serious. It locked ethnic divisions into the constitution, many refugees never returned, and critics said it rewarded ethnic cleansing.
- Dayton talks
- November 1995.
- Two parts
- Federation 51%, Serb Republic 49%.
- IFOR
- 60,000 NATO troops.
Worked example: Judging Dayton
How effective was the Dayton peace process?
- Stopping the war: complete success.
- Keeping the peace: no return to war, helped by IFOR.
- Building a state: weak, divided institutions.
- Justice: few refugees returned; some war criminals were arrested later.
Watch out for this
Dayton solved Bosnia's ethnic divisions.
Dayton ended the fighting but built ethnic divisions into the political system, so politics stayed divided long after 1995.
Check your understanding
Why did Dayton succeed where earlier plans failed?
- The sides were exhausted, NATO had used force and the USA led the talks.
- It gave each group its own independent state.
- The UN imposed it by force.