Editing Dayton Agreement

{{Short description|1995 treaty ending the Bosnian War}}
{{Redirect|Dayton Treaty|the Native American treaty|Treaty with the Kalapuya, etc.}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=May 2024}}
{{Infobox treaty
| name                = Dayton Peace agreement
| long_name           = General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina
| image                = DaytonAgreement.jpg
| image_width          =
| language = [[Bosnian language|Bosnian]], [[Croatian language|Croatian]], [[English language|English]] and [[Serbian language|Serbian]]<ref>{{citation|url=https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/e/0/126173.pdf|title=The General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina|publisher=[[OSCE]]|date=14 December 1995|access-date=23 November 2024}}</ref>
| caption        = Seated from left to right: [[Slobodan Milošević]], [[Alija Izetbegović]], [[Franjo Tuđman]] initialling the Dayton Peace Accords at the Wright-Patterson Air Force Base on 21 November 1995.
| date_drafted        = {{start date|1995|8|10|df=yes}}
| date_signed         = {{start date|1995|11|21|df=yes}} (initialed on)<ref>{{cite news|url=http://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/news_69290.htm|title=15 years ago, Dayton Peace Accords: a milestone for NATO and the Balkans|publisher=NATO|date=14 December 2010|access-date=18 July 2015|archive-date=17 February 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200217163011/https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natolive/news_69290.htm|url-status=live}}</ref>
| location_signed     = [[Wright-Patterson Air Force Base]], [[Dayton, Ohio|Dayton]], [[Ohio]], US
| signatories         = 
* {{flagdeco|United States}} [[Bill Clinton]]
* {{flagicon|Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina}} [[Alija Izetbegović]]
* {{flagicon|Croatia}} [[Franjo Tuđman]]
* {{flagicon|FR Yugoslavia}} [[Slobodan Milošević]]
* {{flagicon|France}} [[Jacques Chirac]]
* {{flagicon|UK}} [[John Major]]
* {{flagicon|Germany}} [[Helmut Kohl]]
* {{flagicon|Russia}} [[Viktor Chernomyrdin]]
* {{flagicon|European Union}} [[Felipe González]]
| parties    =
* {{flag|Federal Republic of Yugoslavia}}
* {{flag|Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina}}
* {{flag|Croatia}}<hr />Witnessed by:
* {{flag|United States|1960}}
* {{flag|France}}
* {{flag|United Kingdom}}
* {{flag|Germany}}
* {{flag|Russia}}
* {{flag|European Union}}<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www1.umn.edu/humanrts/icty/dayton/daytonsum.html |title=Summary of the Dayton Peace Agreement on Bosnia-Herzegovina|author=<!--Staff writer(s); no by-line.--> |date=30 November 1995 |website=www1.umn.edu |access-date=16 January 2016}}</ref>
}}
{{Wikisource|1=General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina}}

The '''General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina''', also known as the '''Dayton Agreement''' or the '''Dayton Accords''' ({{lang-sh-Latn-Cyrl|Dejtonski mirovni sporazum|Дејтонски мировни споразум}}), and colloquially known as '''the Dayton''' ({{langx|hr|Dayton}}, {{langx|bs|Dejton}}, {{langx|sr|Дејтон}}) in ex-Yugoslav parlance, is the peace agreement reached at [[Wright-Patterson Air Force Base]] near [[Dayton, Ohio]], United States, initialed (signed legally) on 21 November 1995,<ref name=":1">{{cite web |date=30 March 1996 |title=Dayton Peace Accords on Bosnia |url=https://1997-2001.state.gov/www/regions/eur/bosnia/bosagree.html |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110522194450/http://1997-2001.state.gov/www/regions/eur/bosnia/bosagree.html |archive-date=22 May 2011 |access-date=19 March 2006 |publisher=US Department of State}}</ref> and signed ceremonially in Paris, on 14 December 1995. These accords put an end to the three-and-a-half-year-long [[Bosnian War]], which was part of the much larger [[Yugoslav Wars]]. 

The warring parties agreed to peace and to a single sovereign state known as [[Bosnia and Herzegovina]] composed of two parts, the largely [[Serbs of Bosnia and Herzegovina|Serb]]-populated [[Republika Srpska]] and mainly [[Croats of Bosnia and Herzegovina|Croat]]-[[Bosniaks|Bosniak]]-populated [[Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina]].

The agreement has been criticized for creating ineffective and unwieldy political structures and entrenching the [[Ethnic cleansing in the Bosnian War|ethnic cleansing of the previous war]].<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Levene |first1=Mark |title=The Limits of Tolerance: Nation–State Building and What It Means for Minority Groups |journal=Patterns of Prejudice |date=2000 |volume=34 |issue=2 |pages=19–40 |doi=10.1080/00313220008559138 |s2cid=144296663 |quote=Consider, instead, one contemporary parallel, Bosnia: the degree to which the international community via the Owen-Vance plan, or even the later Dayton accord, actively promoted or endorsed the destruction of a multi-ethnic society; the degree to which it helped to facilitate the creation of a greater Serbia or an enlarged Croatia; the degree to which it was, at the very least, an [[accessory after the fact]] to both 'ethnic cleansing' and sub-genocide.}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Malik |first1=John |title=The Dayton Agreement and Elections in Bosnia: Entrenching Ethnic Cleansing through Democracy |journal=Stanford Journal of International Law |date=2000 |volume=36 |pages=303}}</ref>

==Negotiation and signature ==
[[File:Balkan Peace Agreement Signing (1995) Clinton Library.webm|thumb|right|300px|Video of the signing of the Dayton Agreement]]
Though basic elements of the Dayton Agreement were proposed in international talks as early as 1992,<ref>[https://web.archive.org/web/20090923145619/http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,976369,00.html Munich All Over Again?], ''[[Time (magazine)|Time]]'', 31 August 1992</ref> these negotiations were initiated following the [[Peace plans offered before and during the Bosnian War|unsuccessful previous peace efforts and arrangements]], the August 1995 Croatian military [[Operation Storm]] and its aftermath, the government military offensive against the [[Republika Srpska (1992–95)|Republika Srpska]], conducted in parallel with NATO's [[Operation Deliberate Force]]. During September and October 1995, world powers (especially the United States and Russia), gathered in the [[Contact Group]], pressured the leaders of the three sides to attend settlement negotiations; Dayton, Ohio was eventually chosen as the venue.<ref>{{ cite web |author=Ferid Muhic |url=https://studies.aljazeera.net/en/reports/2015/12/201512161661175248.html |title=''What was achieved and what to expect?'' |publisher=[[Al_Jazeera_Media_Network#Al_Jazeera_Center_for_Studies | Al Jazeera Studies]] |date=2015-12-16 |access-date=1 May 2024|language=en}}</ref>

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.<ref>{{Cite web|last=Latal|first=Srecko|date=1 October 1995|title=U.S. Envoy Presses Ahead With Balkan Shuttle Diplomacy|url=https://apnews.com/article/ab9925485fb1a8a292948474dc179657|access-date=2021-06-14|work=Associated Press}}</ref> The Holbrooke crew conducted five rounds of intense shuttle diplomacy from August to October,<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Hartwell|first=Leon|date=15 October 2019|title=Conflict Resolution: Lessons from the Dayton Peace Process|journal=Negotiation Journal|volume=35|issue=4|pages=443–469|doi=10.1111/nejo.12300|s2cid=210360406|doi-access=free}}</ref> 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.<ref>{{Cite web|title=The General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Annex 4  |publisher=[[Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe]] |url=https://www.osce.org/files/f/documents/e/0/126173.pdf/ |access-date=1 May 2024|language=en}}</ref>

The Dayton conference took place from 1–21 November 1995. The main participants from the region were the President of the [[Republic of Serbia (1992–2006)|Republic of Serbia]] [[Slobodan Milošević]] (whom the Bosnian Serbs had previously empowered to represent their interests), President of Croatia [[Franjo Tuđman]], and President of Bosnia and Herzegovina [[Alija Izetbegović]] with his Foreign Minister [[Muhamed Sacirbey|Muhamed Šaćirbeg]].<ref>{{ cite web |author=Ivo Komšić |url=https://www.spiritofbosnia.org/volume-11-no-1-2016january/the-dayton-agreement/ |title=''The Dayton Agreement.'' Chapter from the author's The Survived Country – Dividing Bosnia and Herzegovina: Who, When, Where (Zagreb: Synopsis, 2013) |publisher=Spirit of Bosnia|volume=11|issue=1|year=2016|access-date=1 May 2024|language=en}}</ref>

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 [[David Leakey|Col Arundell David Leakey]]. [[Paul Williams (professor)|Paul Williams]], through the [[Public International Law & Policy Group]] (PILPG) 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".<ref>{{cite book |last1=Pinfari |first1=Marco |title=Peace Negotiations and Time Deadline Diplomacy in Territorial Disputes |date=2013 |publisher=Routledge |page=124}}</ref>

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.
[[File:Signing the Dayton Agreement Milosevic Tudjman Izetbegovic.jpg|thumb|The ceremonial signing of the Agreement in Paris, France.]]
After having been initialed (signed legally) in Dayton, Ohio, on 21 November 1995,<ref name=":1" /> the agreement was signed ceremonially in Paris on 14 December 1995<ref>{{cite web|date=30 March 1996|url=https://2009-2017.state.gov/p/eur/rls/or/dayton|title=Dayton Accords|publisher=US Department of State|access-date=5 May 2014}}</ref> and witnessed by [[Prime Minister of Spain|Spanish Prime Minister]] [[Felipe González]], [[President of France|French President]] [[Jacques Chirac]], [[President of the United States|US President]] [[Bill Clinton]], [[Prime Minister of the United Kingdom|UK Prime Minister]] [[John Major]], [[Chancellor of Germany|German Chancellor]] [[Helmut Kohl]] and [[Prime Minister of Russia|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 [[SFRJ|Yugoslavia]] (Article V, annex 1-B).<ref name="ReferenceA">Cannon, P., The Third Balkan War and Political Disunity: Creating A Cantonal Constitutional System for Bosnia-Herzegovina, Jrnl. Trans. L. & Pol., Vol. 5-2</ref>

The present [[political divisions of Bosnia and Herzegovina]] and its [[politics of Bosnia and Herzegovina|structure of government]] were agreed upon (Annex 4). 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.<ref>[https://www.osce.org/bih/126173 Dayton Peace Agreement]</ref>

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.<ref name="ReferenceA"/><ref>[https://www.theguardian.com/global/2015/nov/10/bosnia-bitter-flawed-peace-deal-dayton-agreement-20-years-on Bosnia's bitter, flawed peace deal, 20 years on]</ref>

The agreement mandated a wide range of international organizations to monitor, oversee and implement components of the agreement. The NATO-led [[IFOR]] (Implementation Force) was responsible for implementing military aspects of the agreement and deployed on 20 December 1995, taking over the forces of the [[UNPROFOR]]. The [[High Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina|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 [[1996 Bosnian general election|first free elections in 1996]].<ref name="ReferenceA"/>

===Constitutional Court decision===
{{Politics of Bosnia and Herzegovina}}
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 (a) of the Constitution on those who can refer disputes to the Court. The Court also rejected the other request:

{{blockquote|the Constitutional Court is not competent to evaluate the constitutionality of the General Framework Agreement as the Constitutional Court has in fact been established under the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina in order to uphold this Constitution&nbsp;... The Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina was adopted as Annex IV to the General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and consequently there cannot be a conflict or a possibility for controversy between this Agreement and the Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina.<ref>Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, U-7/97, p. 2 and 3, [[Sarajevo]], 22 December 1997</ref>}}

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 (the Constitution) and the rest of the peace agreement, the Court actually "established the ground for ''legal unity''"<ref>Vehabović, Faris (2006). Odnos Ustava Bosne i Hercegovine i Evropske konvencije za zaštitu ljudskih prava i osnovnih sloboda. Sarajevo: ACIPS, 24. {{ISBN|9958-9187-0-6}}</ref> 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 (Annex IV) 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.<ref>Constitutional Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina, U-1/03, Sarajevo, 25 July 2003.</ref>

==Territorial changes==
[[File:BeforeDayton.png|thumb|Bosniak, Croat and Serb militarily-held areas in 1995 before the signing of the Dayton Peace Agreement]]
[[File:Dayton.png|thumbnail|right|Territorial changes.]]
[[File:Bih dayton en.png|thumb|right|Political division of Bosnia and Herzegovina after the Dayton Agreement.]]
[[File:Serberne flytter.jpg|thumb| Serb families leave their homes due to regulations in the Dayton agreement from 1995.<ref>{{Cite web |title=Bosnia-Hercegovina: A Failure in the Making: Human Rights and the Dayton Agreement |url=https://www.hrw.org/legacy/summaries/s.bosnia966.html |access-date=2022-12-13 |website=www.hrw.org}}</ref> Picture taken near the town of [[Modriča]], northeastern Bosnia]]
Before the agreement, [[Bosnian Serbs]] controlled about 46% of Bosnia and Herzegovina (23,687&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>), [[Bosniaks]] 28% (14,505&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>) and [[Bosnian Croats]] 25% (12,937&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>).

Bosnian Serbs got large tracts of mountainous territories back (4% from Bosnian Croats and some small amounts from Bosniaks), but they had to surrender [[Sarajevo]] and some vital Eastern Bosnian/Herzegovian positions. Their percentage grew to 49% (48% by excluding the Brčko District, 24,526&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>).

Bosniaks got most of Sarajevo and some important positions in eastern Bosnia and Herzegovina while they lost only a few locations on Mount [[Ozren (Bosnia and Herzegovina)|Ozren]] and in western Bosnia. Their percentage grew to 30%, and they greatly improved the quality of the land. Large tracts of prewar Bosniak (and Bosnian Croat) inhabited lands remained under Bosnian Serb control.<ref>{{Cite web |title=THE LAW ON THE CONFIRMATION OF THE GENERAL FRAMEWORK AGREEMENT FOR PEACE IN BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA |url=http://demo.paragraf.rs/demo/combined/Old/t/t2003_02/t02_0030.htm |access-date=2022-12-13 |website=demo.paragraf.rs}}</ref>

Bosnian Croats gave most (4% of BiH territories) back to the Bosnian Serbs (9% of today's RS) and also retreated from Una-Sana [[Donji Vakuf]] (in Central Bosnia) afterward. A small enlargement of [[Posavina]] ([[Odžak]] and parts of Domaljevac) did not change the fact that after Dayton Bosnian Croats controlled just 21% of Bosnia and Herzegovina (10,640&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>), compared to more than 25% prior to Dayton. One of the most important Bosnian Croat territories (Posavina with [[Bosanski Brod]], [[Bosanski Šamac]], [[Derventa]]) was left out of Bosnian Croat control.<ref name="ReferenceA"/>

===Control of Republika Srpska===
*About 89.5% (22,059&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>) was under control of Bosnian Serbs
*About 9% (2,117&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>) of today's territories of Republika Srpska was controlled by Bosnian Croat forces; mainly in municipalities of [[Šipovo]], [[Bosanski Petrovac|Petrovac]], [[Istočni Drvar]], [[Jezero, Republika Srpska|Jezero]], [[Kupres (Republika Srpska)|Kupres (RS)]] and part of [[Banja Luka]] municipality
*About 1.5% (350&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>) of today's territories of Republika Srpska was controlled by Bosniak forces, mainly some villages in [[Ozren (Bosnia and Herzegovina)|Ozren]] (Doboj and [[Petrovo, Bosnia and Herzegovina|Petrovo]]), western Bosnia ([[Krupa na Uni]] and parts of [[Novi Grad, Bosanska Krajina|Novi Grad]] and [[Oštra Luka]]).

===Control of Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina===
*About 53% (13,955&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>) of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina was under Bosniak control.
*About 41% (10,720&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>) of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina was under the control of Bosnian Croats.
*About 6% (1,435&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>) was under control of Bosnian Serbs.

====Cantons====
{{Main|Cantons of the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina}}
[[Canton 10]]:
*was almost completely under control of Bosnian Croats (4,924&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)
*Bosniaks controlled some points east of Kupres (10&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)

[[Una-Sana Canton]]:
*was almost completely under control of Bosniaks (3,925&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)
*Bosnian Croats controlled some mountain passes on the southern parts of Bosanski Petrovac and Bihać municipalities (200&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)

[[West Herzegovina Canton]]:
*was completely under Bosnian Croat control (1,362&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)

[[Herzegovina-Neretva Canton]]:
*was divided, more than half was under Bosnian Croat control (2,525&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)
*northern and central parts were under Bosniak control (1,666&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)
*eastern mountains were under Bosnian Serb control (210&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)

[[Central Bosnia Canton]]:
*was divided, a bit more than a third was under Bosnian Croat control (1,099&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)
*rest was under control of Bosniaks (2,090&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)

[[Zenica-Doboj Canton]]:
*was largely under Bosniak control (2,843&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)
*there were some small enclaves like [[Žepče]], [[Usora Municipality|Usora]] under Bosnian Croat control (400&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)
*eastern mountains were under Bosnian Serb control (100&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)

[[Tuzla Canton]]:
*was largely under Bosniak control (2,544&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)
*there were some villages in [[Gradačac]] municipality under Bosnian Croat control (5&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)
*and some villages in [[Doboj]] and [[Gračanica, Bosnia and Herzegovina|Gračanica]] municipalities under Bosnian Serb control (100&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)

[[Posavina Canton]]:
*was mostly under Bosnian Croat control (205&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)
*Bosnian Serbs controlled [[Odžak]] and parts of [[Domaljevac]] municipalities (120&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)

[[Bosnian Podrinje Canton]]:
*was mostly under Bosniak control (405&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)
*Bosnian Serbs controlled areas which linked it with Sarajevo (100&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)

[[Sarajevo Canton]]:
*was mostly under Bosnian Serbs control (800&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)
*while Bosniaks controlled some southern suburbs and most of the city itself (477&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)

[[Brčko District]] was divided;
*Bosniaks controlled most of its southern parts (200&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |date=2015-12-04 |title=Энгельгардт Георгий Николаевич. Республика Сербская в Боснии и Герцеговине. Возникновение и эволюция (1990–2006 гг.) |url=https://inslav.ru/event/engelgardt-georgiy-nikolaevich-respublika-serbskaya-v-bosnii-i-gercegovine-vozniknovenie-i |access-date=2022-12-13 |website=Институт славяноведения Российской академии наук (ИСл РАН)}}</ref>
*Bosnian Serbs its northern parts (193&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)<ref name=":0" />
*While Bosnian Croats controlled the rest, part near [[Orašje, Bosnia|Orašje]] municipality and two enclaves on southern parts of municipality (100&nbsp;km<sup>2</sup>)

==Appraisals==
The immediate purpose of the agreement was to freeze the military confrontation and prevent it from resuming. It was therefore defined as a "construction of necessity".<ref>Rory Keane, ''Reconstructing sovereignty. Post-Dayton Bosnia uncovered'', London: Ashgate 2001, p. 61</ref>

The Dayton Agreement was aimed at allowing Bosnia and Herzegovina to move from an early post-conflict phase through reconstruction and consolidation, adopting a [[consociationalism|consociational power-sharing]] approach.<ref>{{cite book|first=Sumantra|last=Bose|year=2002|title=Bosnia After Dayton: Nationalist Partition and International Intervention|location=Oxford|publisher=Oxford University Press|page=216|isbn=1-85065-585-5}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal|title=Consociational Settlements and Reconstruction: Bosnia in Comparative Perspective (1995–Present)|journal=The Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science|first=Sherrill|last=Stroschein|year=2014|volume=656|pages=97–115|doi=10.1177/0002716214544459|s2cid=8830183}}</ref> Scholars such as Canadian professor Charles-Philippe David calls Dayton "the most impressive example of conflict resolution".<ref>Charles-Philippe David, "Alice in Wonderland meets Frankenstein: Constructivism, Realism and Peacebuilding in Bosnia", ''Contemporary Security Policy'' 22, No.1, 2001</ref><ref>{{cite book|author1=Raphael Israeli|author2=Albert Benabou|title=Savagery in the Heart of Europe: The Bosnian War (1992–1995) Context, Perspectives, Personal Experiences, and Memoirs|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=eAV-AgAAQBAJ&pg=PA380|year=2013|page=380|publisher=Strategic Book |isbn=9781628570151}}</ref> American scholar Howard M. Hensel states that "Dayton represents an example of a conflict resolution negotiation that was successful.<ref>{{cite book|author=Howard M. Hensel|title=Sovereignty and the Global Community: The Quest for Order in the International System|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=4pxADwAAQBAJ&pg=PT208|year=2017|publisher=Taylor & Francis|page=208|isbn=9781351148702}}</ref> However, Patrice C. McMahon and Jon Western write that "As successful as Dayton was at ending the violence, it also sowed the seeds of instability by creating a decentralized political system that undermined the state's authority".<ref>{{cite journal|url=https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/bosnia-herzegovina/2009-08-17/death-dayton|title=The Death of Dayton: How to Stop Bosnia From Falling Apart|first1=Patrice C.|last1=McMahon|first2=Jon|last2=Western|journal=Foreign Affairs|issue=September/October|year=2009|volume=88 }}</ref>

[[High Representative for Bosnia and Herzegovina|High Representative]] [[Wolfgang Petritsch]] argued in 2006 that the Dayton framework has allowed the [[international community]] to move "from statebuilding via institutions and capacity-building to identity building", putting Bosnia and Herzegovina "on the road to [[European Union|Brussels]]".<ref>[[Wolfgang Petritsch]], "My lessons learnt in Bosnia and Herzegovina", Sarajevo, 2006</ref>

The Dayton Agreement has been the subject of criticism since its inception, including:

* ''A complicated government system'' – As part of the Dayton agreement, Bosnia was divided regionally between two "Entities" within a consociational democracy, which was established to ensure the political representation and power of all sides. This can lead to an unproductive government in that every important issue is deadlocked within the central government as each party is championing opposing priorities that are based on ethnic policies and not shared ideals.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Yourdin|first1=C|title=Society Building in Bosnia: A Critique of Post-Dayton Peacebuilding Efforts'|journal=Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations|date=2003|volume=4|issue=2|pages=59–74}}</ref>

* ''Dependency and control of international actors'' – Dayton was very much an international vision, led by the United States who supported an end to the war, but that did not allow Bosnian leaders to negotiate an ending to the war, therefore leaving no incentive in the afterward peacebuilding process and no area for leaders to discuss the underlying root causes of the conflict. International actors also played an extensive role in shaping the postwar agenda in Bosnia. The international community invests millions of dollars in BiH yearly through NGOs. However, this stifles the impact of local actors and the development of civil society. Instead, the international community should invest in local actors, youth activists, and democratization projects.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Chandler|first1=David|title=From Dayton to Europe|journal=International Peacekeeping|date=2005|volume=12|issue=3|pages=336–349|doi=10.1080/13533310500074077|s2cid=144226240}}</ref> The influx of NGOs and international actors to kick start investment in the country post war also failed to kick start the economy, with Bosnia suffering from poor economic growth (2% in 2015). The lack of economic development has been attributed to poor coordination between international actors and lack of consideration for local capacity.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Kell, Kudlenko|first1=S, A|title=Bosnia and Herzegovina 20 years after Dayton, complexity born of paradoxes|journal=International Peacekeeping|year=2015|volume=22|issue=5|pages=471–489|doi=10.1080/13533312.2015.1103651|s2cid=146390988|url=http://create.canterbury.ac.uk/13993/3/Keil_and_Kudlenko_2015_Bosnia_and_Herzegovina_Twenty_Years_after_Dayton.pdf|access-date=19 April 2019|archive-date=29 October 2020|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201029220017/http://create.canterbury.ac.uk/13993/3/Keil_and_Kudlenko_2015_Bosnia_and_Herzegovina_Twenty_Years_after_Dayton.pdf|url-status=dead}}</ref>

* ''Ending the war but not promoting peace'' – The primary aim of Dayton was to stop the war, but the agreement was only meant to be a temporary measure while a long-term plan was developed. The Dayton Agreement was the 35th attempt at a ceasefire following 34 other failed attempts. While Dayton has halted the conflict and there has not been a resurgence of violence, the stability in the conflict does not give an accurate assessment of peace. There is negative peace in BiH, meaning there is no open conflict or violence. However, there is no positive peace, as conditions that eliminate the causes of violence have not been reached. There is still currently an international military presence, [[Operation Althea|EUFOR Althea]], responsible for overseeing compliance with aspects of the Dayton Agreement. The Dayton Agreement provided peace by re-establishing and codifying division. Enforcing such peace can be seen as highlighting the still deep rooted tensions in the country, with Dayton covering the cracks of a fractured society that could be plunged back into conflict as soon as military forces left.<ref>{{cite journal|last1=Berdal |first1=M| last2=Collantes-Celador|first2=G|title=Post-War Violence in Bosnia and Herzegovina|journal=Conflict, Development and Peacebuilding|pages=75–94}}</ref>

*''Consociational Democracy'' – The Dayton Agreement established a consociational democracy in Bosnia and Herzegovina. This means that each group is ensured representation and power. This incentivized the end of the Bosnian War, but first requires collaboration or reconciliation for the government to function. Bosnia and Herzegovina operates with a three-member president role. There is a Croat, Bosniak, and Serb president. Similar quotas and rules apply for the two legislative bodies.

*''Entrenching territorialized ethnicity'' - The Agreement was underpinned by a territorialized definition of ethnicity that divided Bosnia and Herzegovina into three constitutive nations and two distinct entities based on ethno-nationalist identities.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Rutar |first1=Sabine |editor1-last=Breuilly |editor1-first=John |title=The Oxford Handbook of the History of Nationalism |date=2013 |publisher=Oxford University Press |location=Oxford | isbn=978-0-19-876820-3 | page=528  | chapter=Nationalism in Southeastern Europe, 1970-2000}}</ref>

According to survey results from a 2020 study, "in each of the three main ethnic groups of Bosnia, more people would have voted for Dayton than against it."<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Morgan-Jones|first1=Edward|last2=Stefanovic|first2=Djordje|last3=Loizides|first3=Neophytos|date=2020-10-21|title=Citizen endorsement of contested peace settlements: public opinion in post-Dayton Bosnia|url=https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2020.1828356|journal=Democratization|volume=28|issue=2|pages=434–452|doi=10.1080/13510347.2020.1828356|s2cid=226332147|issn=1351-0347}}</ref>

==Disappearance of the Bosnian copy==
On 13 February 2008, the head of the [[Presidency of Bosnia-Herzegovina]] [[Željko Komšić]] said that the 1995 Bosnian copy Dayton Agreement was lost from the Presidency's archive. High Representative for Bosnia-Herzegovina [[Miroslav Lajčák]] said: "I don't know whether the news is sad or funny".<ref>{{cite news|title=Izgubljen original Dejtonskog sporazuma |url=http://www.blic.rs/Vesti/Republika-Srpska/30394/Izgubljen-original-Dejtonskog-sporazuma |work=[[Blic]] |date=13 February 2008 |language=sr |access-date=21 November 2012}}</ref> On 16 November 2009 the French Foreign Ministry delivered a new certified copy of the Dayton agreement to the French embassy in Sarajevo. The copy was later transferred to the Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Bosnia-Herzegovina.<ref>{{cite news|title=Francuska dostavila BiH kopiju Dejtonskog sporazuma |url=http://www.politika.rs/vesti/najnovije-vesti/FRANCUSKA-DOSTAVILA-BiH-KOPIJU-DEJTONSKOG-SPORAZUMA-i112057.lt.html |newspaper=[[Politika]] |date=16 November 2009 |language=sr |access-date=21 November 2012}}</ref> The stolen 1995 copy was found in 2017 in a private residence in [[Pale, Bosnia and Herzegovina|Pale]], resulting in the arrest of the person who was trying to sell it.<ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.b92.net/eng/news/region.php?yyyy=2017&mm=11&dd=01&nav_id=102695|title=Man arrested in possession of original Dayton Agreement|work=b92.net|date=1 November 2017|access-date=13 April 2018}}</ref>

==See also==
* [[Washington Agreement]]
* [[Peace plans offered before and during the Bosnian War]]
* [[Proposed secession of Republika Srpska]]
* [[Constitutional reform in Bosnia and Herzegovina]]
* [[Erdut Agreement]]

==References==
{{Reflist}}

==Further reading==
* Allcock, John B., Marko Milivojevic, et al. ''Conflict in the Former Yugoslavia: An Encyclopedia'' (1998)
* {{cite journal|last=Belloni|first=Roberto|title=Bosnia: Dayton is dead! long live dayton!|journal=Nationalism and Ethnic Politics|volume=15|issue=3–4|pages=355–375|year=2009|doi=10.1080/13537110903372367|s2cid=143858915|hdl=11572/76874|hdl-access=free}}
* {{cite journal|last=Bieber|first=Florian|title=Croat Self-Government in Bosnia: A Challenge for Dayton? |journal=ECMI Brief|publisher=[[European Centre for Minority Issues]]|year=2001 |url=https://edoc.vifapol.de/opus/volltexte/2009/1991/pdf/brief_5.pdf}}
* Caplan, R., 2000. "Assessing the Dayton Accord: The structural weaknesses of the general framework agreement for peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina". ''Diplomacy and Statecraft'', 11(2), pp.&nbsp;213–232.
* {{cite book|last=Chandler|first=David|title=Bosnia: Faking Democracy After Dayton|url=https://books.google.com/books?id=bLXq7a2CoxoC|year=2000|publisher=Pluto Press|isbn=978-0-7453-1689-5}}
* {{cite journal|last=Chivvis|first=Christopher S.|title=The Dayton Dilemma|journal=Survival|volume=52|issue=5|pages=47–74|year=2010|doi=10.1080/00396338.2010.522096|s2cid=153915349}}
* Chollet, Derek.  ''The Road to the Dayton Accords'' (Palgrave Macmillan, New York, 2005). [https://www.amazon.com/Road-Dayton-Accords-American-Statecraft/dp/1403965005/ excerpt]
* Chollet, Derek H., and Samantha Power. ''The unquiet American: Richard Holbrooke in the world'' (Public Affairs, 2011).
* Curran, Daniel, James K. Sebenius, and Michael Watkins. "Two Paths to Peace: Contrasting George Mitchell in Northern Ireland with Richard Holbrooke in Bosnia–Herzegovina". ''Negotiation Journal'' 20.4 (2004): 513–537. [http://www.people.hbs.edu/jsebenius/articles_scans/04_NJ_TwoPathsToPeace_Mitchell-Holbrooke.pdf  online]
* Daalder, I.H., 2014. ''Getting to Dayton: the making of America's Bosnia policy''. Brookings Institution Press.
* {{cite journal|last=Donais|first=Timothy|title=The politics of privatization in post-Dayton Bosnia|journal=Southeast European Politics|volume=3|issue=1|year=2002|pages=3–19}}
* Goodby, J.E., 1996. "When war won out: Bosnian peace plans before Dayton". ''International Negotiation'', 1(3), pp.&nbsp;501–523.
* Parish, M., 2007. "The Demise of the Dayton protectorate. Inside the Bosnian Crisis: Documents and Analysis". ''Journal of Intervention and Statebuilding'', 1, pp.&nbsp;11–23.
* {{cite journal|last1=Tuathail|first1=Gearóid Ó.|last2=O'Loughlin|first2=John|last3=Djipa|first3=Dino|title=Bosnia-Herzegovina ten years after Dayton: Constitutional change and public opinion|journal=Eurasian Geography and Economics|volume=47|issue=1|pages=61–75|year=2006|doi=10.2747/1538-7216.47.1.61|s2cid=43955186}}
* {{cite journal|last=Woodward|first=Susan L.|title=Implementing Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina: a post-Dayton primer and memorandum of warning|journal=Foreign Policy Studies Program|publisher=Brookings Institution|year=1996}}
* {{cite web|author=Adriana Camisar, Boris Diechtiareff, Bartol Letica, Christine Switzer|title=An Analysis of the Dayton Negotiations and Peace Accords|publisher=The Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy|year=2005|url=http://ocw.tufts.edu/data/12/244825.pdf|access-date=14 April 2017|archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170808230216/http://ocw.tufts.edu/data/12//244825.pdf|archive-date=8 August 2017|url-status=dead}}

==External links==
{{commons category|Dayton Agreement}}
*[https://web.archive.org/web/20160305073517/http://www.ucdp.uu.se/gpdatabase/peace/BoH%2019951121.pdf General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina]
*[https://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/153203/Dayton-Accords ''Encyclopædia Britannica'', Dayton Accords]
*[http://peacemaker.un.org/bosniadaytonagreement95 Full text of the General Framework Agreement for Peace in Bosnia and Herzegovina], UN Peacemaker
*[http://peacemaker.un.org/document-search?keys=&field_padate_value%5Bvalue%5D%5Bdate%5D=&field_pacountry_tid=Bosnia+and+Herzegovina Text of all peace agreements for Bosnia and Herzegovina], UN Peacemaker
*[http://www.ejil.org/issue.php?issue=56 The Dayton Agreements: A Breakthrough for Peace and Justice?], a Symposium at the ''European Journal of International Law''
*[http://www.bosnia.org.uk/news/news_body.cfm?newsid=2202 Bosnia: a single country or an apple of discord?] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150923194522/http://www.bosnia.org.uk/news/news_body.cfm?newsid=2202 |date=23 September 2015 }}, [[Bosnian Institute]], 12 May 2006
*[https://web.archive.org/web/20060524164925/http://www.usip.org/events/2005/1121_dayton.html Beyond Dayton: The Balkans and Euro-Atlantic Integration] [[U.S. Institute of Peace]] Event, November 2005 (Audio & transcripts)
*[http://peacemaker.un.org/document-search?field_pacountry_tid=Bosnia+and+Herzegovina/ All Peace Agreements in Bosnia, UN Peacemaker]

{{Bosnian War}}
{{Yugoslavia topics}}
{{Alija Izetbegović}}
{{Franjo Tuđman}}
{{Authority control}}

[[Category:Bosnian peace process]]
[[Category:Bosnian War]]
[[Category:Greene County, Ohio]]
[[Category:Wright-Patterson Air Force Base]]
[[Category:High Representatives for Bosnia and Herzegovina]]
[[Category:History of Dayton, Ohio]]
[[Category:Treaties of Bosnia and Herzegovina]]
[[Category:Treaties concluded in 1995]]
[[Category:Peace treaties]]
[[Category:Treaties of Serbia]]
[[Category:Peace treaties of Croatia]]
[[Category:Bosnia and Herzegovina–United States relations]]
[[Category:1995 in Bosnia and Herzegovina]]
[[Category:1995 in the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia]]
[[Category:1995 in the United States]]
[[Category:1995 in Croatia]]
[[Category:1995 in Ohio]]
[[Category:1995 in Paris]]
[[Category:Slobodan Milošević]]
[[Category:Alija Izetbegović]]
[[Category:Serbia–United States relations]]
[[Category:November 1995 in the United States]]
[[Category:Bosnia and Herzegovina–European Union relations]]
[[Category:Presidency of Bill Clinton]]
[[Category:Power sharing]]
[[Category:Bosnia and Herzegovina–Croatia relations]]
[[Category:Political history of Bosnia and Herzegovina]]
[[Category:Political history of Croatia]]
[[Category:Treaties signed in Paris|1995]]