Odbacivanje lažnog diskursa podjele: Razlog za optimizam u BiH
Skoro
svakodnevno se sastajem sa nekim lokalnim političarem ili predstavnikom vlasti.
Razgovori su skoro uvijek isti. On (a nažalost, to je skoro uvijek “on”) ulaže
ogromnu količinu vremena i energije kako bi mi objasnio zašto njegova stranka
ne može pristati na kompromis pri rješavanju problema u BiH. Ovo obično uključuje i komentar o razlikama
među etničkim grupama, o tome kako su drugi krivi, kako je postizanje rješenja
nemoguće i kako međunarodna zajednica mora intervenisati da bi se prekinuo
zastoj. Ali, uprkos negativnom političkom diskursu i samonametnutim “nerješivim”
situacijama, mi primjećujemo da različiti aspekti života u BiH, zapravo, daju
razlog za optimizam.
Prošle
sedmice, prilikom posjete Mostaru, sastao sam se sa grupom mladih ljudi,
predstavnika Omladinskog vijeća Mostara, kako bih im čestitao na manifestaciji
koju su organizovali u martu. Oni su
okupili mlade ljude iz oba dijela grada – drugim riječima, Bošnjake, Srbe, Hrvate
i vjerovatno neke iz kategorije “Ostalih”. Glavna slika sa ovog događaja gdje
su se okupile stotine učenika na jednom od mostarskih mostova, spajajući tako
dvije polovine gradskog grba, jako me se dojmila. Obzirom na medijsku pozornost i pozitivne komentare
koje je ovaj događaj dobio, u vrijeme dok je Mostar politički podijeljen, a
njegovi građani razočarani u svoje lidere, snažno je odjeknuo među mnogima,
kako u Mostaru i BiH, tako i u cijelom regionu. Poruka da su “obje strane”
Mostara zapravo na istoj strani je važna poruka koju, vjerujem, podržava većina
građana. To je poruka svih onih koji vjeruju da podjele u BiH nisu izbor njenih građana, već rezultat
političke manipulacije.
Kontrast
između mladih Bosanaca i Hercegovaca i njihovih izabranih i političkih lidera
ne može biti veći. Kad se sastajem sa
mladima u ovoj zemlji, prosto me okrepljuju njihova nadanja, težnje i njihova
želja da se zajednički angažuju na izgradnji bolje Bosne i Hercegovine.
Odnedavno me sve više i više impresionira njihova hrabrost, sposobnost i
predanost ovoj zemlji. Dok lideri grada
Mostara odbijaju čak i da sjednu za isti sto kako bi rješavali mnoge probleme
koje taj grad ima, mladi iz različitih zajednica se okupljaju i na simboličan
način govore o jedinstvu. To je scenario kojem sve češće svjedočim, od Trebinja
do Bihaća, od Brčkog do Stoca, zapravo u cijeloj zemlji. Dok su političke elite
i dalje u starim, istrošenim borbama koje odvlače pozornost sa stvarnih
problema i uglavnom brižno štite svoj vlastiti interes i produžetak statusa
quo, mladi ljudi su se počeli buniti i govoriti “ne” i mislim da će im se mnogi
građani pridružiti. Političari bi trebali početi raditi u korist promjena ili
se skloniti sa puta.
Mladi
ove zemlje shvataju da su njihovi problemi, bez obzira na njihovu etničku
pripadnost ili religiju, isti. Mladi ove
zemlje znaju da su podjele i razlike koje su nametnule uskostranačke politike
vještačke i da ih treba ukloniti. Mladi ove zemlje neće pristati da budu taoci
sukoba i sporova iz prošlosti. Zato
toliko svog vremena i sredstava Ambasade odvajam na mlade ljude u BiH.
Kako
sam rekao mojim novim prijateljima iz Omladinskog vijeća Mostara njihova ideja
da su dvije strane Mostara zaista na istoj strani veoma je snažna. Mislim da su
njihova razmišljanja i želje slične onima koje ima veoma snažna, često tiha, većina: obični građani koji poštuju svoje
komšije, bez obzira na njihovu vjeru ili etnicitet; uposlenici NVO koji se
trude stvoriti jako, sposobno i neovisno civilno društvo u BiH, kritičari koji
imaju dovoljno hrabrosti da prozivaju političare zbog njihovih pogrešnih djela
i koji zbog toga često trpe posljedice.
Mladi imaju potencijal da apeluju na ovu grupu i da ujedine one koji ne
prihvataju trenutno stanje, nego se pitaju zašto ne bi moglo biti drugačije i
bolje. Građani BiH žele lidere koji će
sarađivati, praviti kompromise kako bi došli do rješenja i pomagati ovoj zemlji
kako bi ona i njeni građani napredovali.
To je poruka koju mnogi mladi ljudi u BiH savršeno razumiju. I to je poruka
koju lideri moraju početi da shvataju.
###
Rejecting the False Discourse of Division: A Reason for Optimism in BiH
Nearly every day I meet with a local political or
government leader. The conversation is almost always the same. He
(and it is, unfortunately, almost always “he”) invests a great deal of time and
energy telling me why his party cannot compromise to solve problems in
BiH. This usually includes commentary on differences between
ethnic groups, how the other side is to blame, how finding solutions
is impossible, and how the international community must intervene to break
the deadlock. But despite the negative political discourse and the self
imposed stalemates we see in so many aspects of life in BiH, in fact, there are
reasons to be optimistic.
Last week, while in Mostar, I sat down with a group of
young people representing the Mostar Youth Council so I could congratulate
them on an event they organized in March. They brought together young
people from both sides of their city – in other words, Bosniaks, Serbs, Croats
and probably some “others” as well. The main image from that event, of hundreds
of students coming together on one of Mostar’s bridges and joining two halves
of Mostar’s city emblem, resonated strongly with me. And given the press
attention and positive accolades they received, it resonated strongly with many
others in Mostar, BiH, and throughout the region at a time when Mostar is
politically divided and citizens are disappointed in their leaders. The
message – that the “two sides” of Mostar are really on the same side – is an
important one which I believe most citizens support. It is a message
that supports all those who believe that divisions in BiH are not the
choice of its citizens, but the result of political manipulation.
The contrast between Bosnia and Herzegovina’s young people
and its elected and political leaders could not be more stark. When I
meet young people in this country, I am energized by their hope, their
aspirations, and their desire to work together to build a better Bosnia and
Herzegovina. Of late, I have also become increasingly impressed with
their courage, capabilities and their commitment to this country. While
Mostar’s political leaders refuse even to sit in the same room together to work
on that city’s many problems, young people from all communities come together
symbolically to talk about unity. It is a scenario I see more and more
often, from Trebinje to Bihac, from Brcko to Stolac, and everywhere in
between. While political elites fight tired, old fights which distract
from the real issues and mostly closely protect their own interests and the
continuation of the status quo, young people are starting to stand up and say
“no,” and I think more citizens will join them. Politicians will need to
work for change or get out of the way.
The youth of this country realize that they share the same
problems regardless of their ethnicity or religion. The youth of
this country know that divisions and differences imposed
by narrow-minded politics are artificial and deserve to be
removed. The youth of this country will not accept being hostages of past
conflicts and disputes. This is why I invest so much of my time and my
embassy’s resources in BiH’s young people.
As I told my new friends at the Mostar Youth Council,
their idea that the two sides of Mostar are really on the same side is very
powerful. I believe their opinions and desires are shared by a very
strong, often silent, majority: the ordinary citizens who respect their
neighbors, regardless of their religion or ethnicity; the NGO workers who
strive to create a strong, capable, independent civil society in BiH; the
critics who are courageous enough to call out politicians for their misdeeds,
and often suffer the consequences. Youth have the capacity to appeal to
this group, and bring together those who do not accept things as they are, but
ask why they cannot be different and better. The people of BiH want
leaders who will work together, compromise to find solutions, and help move
this country and its people forward. This is a message many of the youth
of BiH clearly understand. And it is a message that leaders must begin to
understand.
Otvoreno pismo
ReplyDeleteNjegovoj Ekselenciji, ambasadoru Sjedinjenih Američkih Država
Uvažena ekselencijo,
Gospodine Patrick Moon,
Obraćam Vam se u ime Centra za kulturu dijaloga, nevladine organizacije koja već petnaest godina kroz mrežu od preko 50 škola u BiH promovira debatu, kulturu dijaloga i kritičko mišljenje, kao najvrednije alatke u razvoju demokratskog društva. Centar za kulturu dijaloga, između ostalog:
Promovira principe „otvorenog društva“, upravo kako je Karl Popper definirao takvo društvo: društvo bez monopola na istinu.
Godinama povezuje mlade ljude iz cijele BiH, ne kroz sporadične projekte nego kontinuiranim i nimalo jednostavnim radom, a posljednjih godina uvodeći koncept javnih debata na najvišim razinama društva o aktualnim društvenim, obrazovnim i političkim temama.
U posljednjih sedam dana pročitala sam Vaša dva teksta objavljena u dnevnim novinama Oslobođenje: „Odbacivanje lažnog diskursa podjele: Razlog za optimizam u BiH“ i „Slobodno tržište ideja“ . Tim povodom želim reći da mi je:
Žao što govoreći o mladima iz Mostara, ne govorite i o mladim ljudima npr. sa Pala i Medrese iz Sarajeva koji se svakog mjeseca druže zahvaljujući debatnom programu BiH (CKD);
Žao mi je što u posljednjih 5 godina niti jedan odjel vaše Ambasade nije podržao debatne projekte koji okupljaju mlade ljude, grade mostove među njima i ruše etnonacionalne barijere;
Žao mi je što u posljednjih 5 godina nikada ni za jednu aktivnost CKD-a nismo dobili čak ni pismenu podršku Vaše Ambasade, pa čak i kada smo organizirali Svjetsko debatno takmičenje 2009. godine, prvo i posljednje takmičenje tog ranga u BiH, a u čijoj finalnoj debatnoj rundi je učestvovala ekipa iz SAD;
Žao mi je što nikada niste pokazali interes da se upoznate sa radom organizacije koja punih 15 godina promovira najviše standarde debate i „podnošenja računa očima javnosti“ (John Rawls), upravo onakvog podnošenja računa kakvo podržavate u aktivnostima CCI prema institucijama vlasti u BiH;
Žao mi je što upravo dok spominjete debatu ne spominjete jedinu organizaciju koja je članica 2 svjetske debatne organizacije (IDEA i WSDC) i organizaciju koja je prepoznatljiva po maniru neutralnog i suzdržanog organizatora koji nikada niti jednu političku opciju ne promovira, te je zbog toga nerijetko na meti dijela nevladinog sektora koji smatra da se angažman NVO mjeri prema bliskosti „lijevim“ političkim krugovima ili pozivima na ulične proteste;
Nažalost, ignorirati i ne podržavati rad organizacije koja je u svakom segmentu svog djelovanja pokazala privrženost istinskoj ideji izgradnje civilnog društva u BiH ne hrabri i ne jača nas u plemenitoj misiji „razvijanja kritičkog mišljenja i demokratskih principa odlučivanja, stvaranja kroz debatu novog demokratskog modela civilnog društva“.
ReplyDeleteŽao mi je što dok govorite o CCI spominjete riječ debata ne primijetivši da debate o transparentnosti svih nas u NVO nema, a čak se u novije doba stvara atmosfera koja mogućnost debate o transparentnosti rada i financiranja NVO sektora potpuno osporava.
CCI nadzire rad državnih institucija i treba imati punu podršku za taj projekt, ali sama ne smije kršiti principe koje postavljate pred vlast a koje Vi u svom tekstu eksplicirate: „Da bi demokratija cvjetala, građani moraju imati pristup tačnim informacijama koje se tiču svih aspekata upravljanja. To znači da svako ko tvrdi da predstavlja interese građana ima obavezu da djeluje na transparentan način. To se odnosi i na izabrane lidere, medije i organizacije civilnog društva“. Ali, usprkos činjenici da neka NVO ima plemenite ciljeve, kako i sami navodite, ona nužno mora poštovati principe transparentnosti u svim segmentima svog javnog djelovanja.
Ako CCI predstavljaju interese građana, a pretpostavka je da predstavlja, jer za opće dobro izvještavaju o radu institucija vlasti, onda i oni podliježu principima koje upravo Vi promovirate. No, oni su taj princip odbili, a Vi to nažalost zanemarujete.
Ako zakoni treba da važe za sve podjednako, onda se to odnosi i na Zakon o slobodnom pristupu informacijama. Čak i kada pretpostavimo sasvim loše namjere političara, to onda za NVO aktiviste ne može biti izgovor da ga ne poštuju. U protivnom, iznutra negiramo samu ideju civilnog društva
Ako institucije vlasti 7 godina nisu zabranile pristup predstavnicima CCI da realiziraju svoje projekte monitoringa, onda se treba zapitati zašto sada jesu. Nema opravdanja za kršenje „principa transparentnosti“ ni za jednu stranu u ovom slučaju.
Žao mi je što je izostao Vaš javni poziv za debatu ove dvije strane sa ciljem postizanja kompromisa i konsenzusa što je, složit ćemo se, osnovni postulat parlamentarne demokratije.
Želim vjerovati da ćete ovo moje obraćanje prihvatiti kao dobronamjeran doprinos konstruktivnoj i argumentiranoj debati o nimalo jednostavnim pitanjima koja su se ovih dana otvorila pred našom javnošću. Također, ovo obraćanje je pokušaj da upoznate jednu NVO koja vrijedno 15 godina radi na uspostavljanju kritičkog mišljenja, na reformi obrazovanja kroz uvođenje debate kao vannastavne aktivnosti i ujedno organizacije koja primjerom pokazuje da mladi ove zemlje mogu postići sve kada zajedno rade. Više o CKD možete saznati na www.ckdbih.com
Srdačan pozdrav i unaprijed hvala za Vaše dragocjeno vrijeme,
Sanja Vlaisavljević Sarajevo, 29.4.2013.godine
direktor
Unfortunately, to ignore and not to support the work of this organization which in every segment of its operation showed a true commitment to the idea of civil society in BiH does not encourage and strengthen us in the noble mission of “developing critical thinking and democratic principles of decision making, creating through debate new democratic model of civil society”.
ReplyDeleteI am sorry that while you speak of CCI you mention the word debate, not noticing that there is no debate on transparency of all of us in NGO, and that in recent times an atmosphere is created which completely disputes the possibility of the debate on transparency of work and financing of NGO sector.
CCI controls the work of government institutions and should have full support for this project, but they cannot violate the principles set before the government which you explicated in your text: „For a democracy to flourish, citizens need access to accurate information on all aspects of governance. This means that everyone who claims to represent the interest of citizens has an obligation to be transparent. This applies to elected representatives, the media and civil society“. But, despite the fact that some NGO has noble goals, as you refer to, it must necessarily adhere to the principles of transparency in all segments of its public activity.
If CCI represent interest of citizens, and the assumption is that they do, because they report for the common good on the work of government institutions, then they are subjected to the principles which You promote. But they rejected this principle, and you are unfortunately ignoring it.
If the laws should apply to all equally, than this applies to the Law on Free Access to Information as well. Even when we assume quite the bad intentions of politicians, this cannot be an excuse for NGO activists not to respect him. Otherwise, we negate the very idea of civil society from the inside.
If government institutions did not ban access to CCI representatives for 7 years to implement their monitoring projects, then one must ask why they are doing it now. There is no excuse for the violation of “principle of transparency” for either side in this case.
I am sorry that there was no call for the debate between these two sides from your part, with aim to reach a compromise and consensus which is, we must agree, the basic postulate of parliamentary democracy.
I want to believe that you will accept my addressing as benevolent contribution to constructive and argumentative debate on not at all simple issues which opened these days before our public. Also, this addressing is an attempt to introduce to you one NGO which works with great dedication on establishing critical thinking, reform of education through introducing debate as extracurricular activity and at the same time organization which shows by example that young people in this country can achieve anything when working together. You can find out more about CCD on www.ckdbih.com
Best regards and thank you in advance for your valuable time,
Sanja Vlaisavljević Sarajevo, April 29th 2013
Director
Open letter
ReplyDeleteHis Excellency, the Ambassador of the United States
Distinguished Excellency,
Mr. Patrick Moon,
I am writing to You on behalf of Centre of Cultivating Dialogue, nongovernmental organization which promotes debate, culture of dialogue and critical thinking as most valued tools in development of democratic society through a network of more than 50 schools in BiH for fifteen years. Centre of Cultivating Dialogue, among others:
Promotes principles of “open society”, exactly as Karl Popper defined such society: a society without a monopoly on truth.
For years connects young people from entire BiH, not through sporadic projects, but through continuous and not at all easy ongoing work, and in recent years introducing the concept of public debates at the highest levels of society on current social, educational and political topics.
In the last seven days I have read two of your articles published in daily newspapers Oslobođenje “Rejecting the False Discourse of Division: A Reason for Optimism in BiH” and “A Free Market of Ideas”. On this occasion, I want to say that I am:
Sorry that while talking about young people in Mostar you do not talk about young people from i.e. Pale and Sarajevo Madrasa who have joint gatherings each month thanks to debate program of BiH (CCD);
Sorry that in the last 5 years not one of the departments of Your Embassy had supported debate projects which gather young people, build bridges among them and break ethno-national barriers;
Sorry that in the last 5 years we have not received even written support for any activity from Your Embassy, not even when we organized World Debate Competition (Youth Forum) in 2009, the first and the last competition of this magnitude in BiH, and in which finals participated US team;
Sorry that you have never shown an interest to be introduced to the work of the organization which for 15 years promotes the highest standards of the debate and “public accountability” (John Rawls), the exact public accountability which you support in CCI’s activities towards government institutions in BiH;
Sorry that while you mention the debate you do not mention the only organization which is a member of 2 world debate organizations (IDEA and WSDC) and organization which is recognizable for its manner of neutral and restrained organizer who never promoted any political party, and was thus often the target of the non-governmental sector which feels that NGO engagement is measured based on its proximity to “left” political circles or calls for street protests;