Bordering on Bosnia

Abstract

This paper begins by first giving a critique of the conflict in Bosnia from a geographical and cartographic perspective; and in particular how plans to address and solve the crisis have revolved around the cartographic delineation of territory. This is in effect a process of ‘bordering’ on Bosnia. What are the consequences of using maps to partition multi-ethnic states by constructing regions of ethnic dominance? What alternative territorial divisions might be available which are more sensitive to local use of resources? Second, the paper examines the details of the Dayton plan and argues that it is just the latest of a series of plans for Bosnia which defeat the ideal of pluralism. When the ideal of pluralism is dead, then the necessity of living together dies also. What results is not a desired Bosnia, but a divided Bosnia; one only ‘bordering’ on Bosnia in a kind of quasi- or unreal state. Throughout the paper the focus is on the role that maps have played in the conflict, how they have been contested and how they have been used to support the various interests of the parties involved.