VZCZCXYZ0000
PP RUEHWEB

DE RUEHVJ #0804/01 1880736
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 070736Z JUL 09
FM AMEMBASSY SARAJEVO
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY 0440
INFO RUEAIIA/CIA WASHINGTON DC
RHEFDIA/DIA WASHINGTON DC
RUEKJCS/JCS WASHINGTON DC
RHEHNSC/NSC WASHDC
RUEKJCS/SECDEF WASHINGTON DC

UNCLAS SARAJEVO 000804 
 
SENSITIVE 
SIPDIS 
 
EUR/SCE FOR HYLAND, FOOKS; NSC FOR HELGERSON 
 
E.O. 12958: N/A 
TAGS: PGOV PHUM PREF PREL BK
SUBJECT: REPUBLIKA SRPSKA DELEGATES BLOCK ADOPTION OF 
BOSNIA,S RETURN STRATEGY 
 
¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY:  On June 18, 2009, the Republika Srpska 
(RS) delegates in the House of Peoples of the BiH Parliament 
(BiH HoP) rejected a proposed Revised Strategy for 
implementation of Annex VII (dealing with returns of 
displaced persons in Bosnia and Herzegovina) and returned it 
to the Council of Ministers (CoM) for refinement and 
adjustment.  The delegates demanded that local integration 
and just compensation, or housing solutions for those who 
cannot or do not wish to return, be supported financially and 
treated equally with support for displaced returnees.  In 
response, Bosniak parties, led by the Party of Democratic 
Action (SDA), threatened to withdraw their support for 
passing a Law on Census in the CoM and the State Parliament, 
something the "Prud Three" political leaders agreed to in 
November 2008.  Mario Nenadic, Assistant Minister of Human 
Rights and Refugees (MinHRR) characterized the demand of Serb 
delegates as a dangerous political move that would certainly 
be a death blow to the already-fragile return process. 
Nenadic suggested the Parliamentary vote was a consequence of 
a long-term campaign by some inside the MinHRR working in the 
interest of Serb nationalist political leaders. END SUMMARY. 
 
RS Pushes for Integration 
------------------------- 
 
¶2. (SBU) On June 18, 2009, RS delegates from the Alliance of 
Independent Social Democrats (SNSD) and the Party of 
Democratic Progress (PDP) in the BIH HoP rejected the 
proposed Revised Strategy for implementation of Annex VII 
(the annex of the Dayton Peace Agreement that deals with the 
rights of displaced persons and refugees to return and 
repossess their property) in Bosnia, and returned the law to 
the Council of Ministers for "further refinement and 
adjustments."  The Strategy is an improved version of the 
2003 Return Strategy; it provides framework, mechanisms, and 
a range of recommendations for successful and sustainable 
completion of Bosnia's return process by 2014.  The RS 
delegates' main criticism was directed at the Strategy's 
overwhelming support for return (though this is consistent 
with past strategies), while, in their view, it fails to 
equally treat the issue of local integration of displaced 
persons in the communities of displacement, a solution the RS 
delegates exclusively prefer.  The delegates demanded housing 
solutions or just compensation for those families or 
individuals who do not wish or are unable to return to their 
prewar communities.  Finally, they asked the CoM to propose a 
Law on a Fund for Just Compensation as a necessary legal 
basis for implementation of just compensation. 
 
Bosniak Parties Retaliate 
------------------------- 
 
¶3. (SBU) Rejection of the Strategy prompted fierce reactions 
by Bosniak politicians, especially Sulejman Tihic, the 
President of SDA, and Beriz Belkic, from the Party for Bosnia 
and Herzegovina (SBiH).  Tihic said his party would, in 
response to RS rejection of the Return Strategy, block the 
adoption of the Law on Census in both the CoM and the 
Parliament. (Note: this Law must be passed if Bosnia and 
Herzegovina is to carry out a census in 2011.  The last 
census was conducted in 1991.  If not rectified soon, the 
lack of a current census will impede BiH on its EU path.) 
Tihic told the media that the adoption and implementation of 
Annex VII, the taking of a loan of KM 500 million from 
international banks to support returns, and the carrying out 
of a census in 2011 were all part of the same package, a 
political deal he negotiated with Covic and Dodik in Prud on 
November 8, 2008.  Tihic said that if one element of this 
package agreement fails the whole package fails. 
 
Compensation for Integration not in Annex VII 
--------------------------------------------- 
 
¶4. (SBU) Mario Nenadic, Assistant Minister in the MinHRR and 
our longstanding contact, told the Embassy that the recent 
move of the RS delegates is a dangerous political maneuver. 
He sees it as a final stab at the already fragile and 
diminished return process in Bosnia.  Nenadic explained that 
a provision of just compensation and support for local 
integration to all those who don't want to return to their 
prewar homes has no legal basis in Annex VII.  He explained, 
however, that Annex VII does include (and the Strategy 
foresees) a plan of dealing with compensation issues only for 
those people who, for various reasons, cannot return to their 
prewar places of living and who haven,t been able to 
repossess their property.  Since the property restitution 
process (referring to property illegally occupied or 
destroyed during the recent war) in Bosnia has been very 
successful, the number of individuals and families eligible 
for this kind of assistance would likely not be very high. 
However, the dimensions of this problem are not known at this 
moment.  Nenadic emphasized that the Office of the High 
Representative also agrees with his interpretation. He said 
he is certain that, if a legal basis is created to equally 
support both local integration and return, returns in Bosnia 
would suffer grievously. 
 
Plotting from Inside the Ministry 
--------------------------------- 
 
¶5. (SBU) Nenadic told us that the rejection of the Strategy 
comes as no surprise to him.  For quite some time now, 
Nenadic said, he has seen a clear division along ethnic lines 
in both the MinHRR and in the State Commission for Refugees, 
which allocates joint funding for returnees.  The best 
illustration was a recent allocation of return funds for a 
project in Zvornik, through which local integration of people 
who have no intention of returning was supported.  Also, 
recently several RS-based associations sent a petition with 
10,000 signatures to the Ministry and the Parliament 
supporting the RS delegates' recommendations.  The petition 
was allegedly coordinated by Dragomir Kovac, SNSD Secretary 
of the Ministry, and Mladjen Bozovic, Director of the Return 
Fund. 
 
The End Phase of Returns 
------------------------ 
 
¶6. (SBU) MinHRR claims 140,000 persons (approximately 45,000 
families) still seek return to their prewar homes in Bosnia, 
based on information compiled from individuals and families 
who declared their interest in returning.  The actual figure 
of those who wish to return, as opposed to just receive 
reconstruction assistance for returning, is certainly much 
lower.  UNHCR reports more than 1 million of the 2.2 million 
people who had to flee their homes during the war have 
returned to their prewar homes.  This figure is also highly 
debatable, as the statistics have been generated primarily on 
property repossessions, not on actual returns.  NGO estimates 
of the actual number of returnees fluctuate between 30 and 60 
percent of that figure, depending on the municipality. 
Provisional statistical figures on return have dropped during 
the past few years, in part due to slow, inefficient, and 
inadequate action of local authorities in supporting the 
process. 
 
Comment 
------- 
 
¶7. (SBU) The story of actual returns in Bosnia is more or 
less complete. No matter how much more assistance is 
provided, a great new influx of returnees is highly unlikely. 
 However, Bosnia should have the capacity and the mechanisms 
to assist those who wish to return, so that it can formally 
close this chapter by the end of year 2014.  The Revised 
Strategy for implementation of Annex VII is (or was) a means 
of doing so. On the other hand, calls for the moral and legal 
equivalency of local integration which come from RS delegates 
contain a dangerous message that the results of ethnic 
cleansing are now being cemented and that non-return deserves 
equal attention and assistance as return.  This would run 
counter to all the efforts and millions of dollars the 
international community has invested in returns over the 
years.  Local integration is something the RS has been 
supporting for years, both politically and financially, in 
parallel with international support for actual returns. No 
one can or will stop the RS from continuing to do so in the 
years to come. However, blessing that process at the State 
level and enshrining it into the Strategy for implementation 
of Annex VII would open a Pandora's box. 
ENGLISH