The issues - THE OMARSKA MEMORIAL DEBATE

Issues for the Memorial Project

There are a number of issues that need to be considered about the Omarska Memorial project, which have so far either not been considered fully. In our view, these should inform a proper constulation among survivors and families of the missing.

principles

Transparency: Nobody has anything to gain from a closed process, which is not subject to open and honest debate. So far the lack of transparency on the part of Mittal's appointed mediators has led to confusion, divisions and feelings of betrayal among survivors; but they have also contributed to a defensive and obstructive attitude among Serb officials in the area despite the fact that they should have nothing to fear from a memorial that helps Bosnians of all backgrounds move on and look forward to the economic benefits that Mittal's involvement in the country could bring.
Open Debate: We have so far been unable to obtain a clear and up-to-date statement of what the memorial project seeks to achieve and how it intends to do so. There has been no attempt to consult beyond a small group of respected individuals from the Bosniak community of Prijedor and Kozarac, and even these people do not seem to know everything that has taken place with regard to the project. And anyway, they cannot be expected to bear the full responsibility of deciding upon such an important matter for Bosnia as a whole. Nobody has anything to fear from open, honest, respectful democratic debate.
Inclusion: It is wrong of mediators to seek to exclude those survivors who do not agree with the way they have handled the project. Everybody seems to agree that there should be a memorial, and we have not come across members of the survivor communities who does not want the memorial to succeed. There is a legitimate debate about methods, but that should include the whole range of opinion on this matter.

Expertise: There is a base level of domain-specific expertise required here, and it is unrealistic to expect a 2-person British charity - one that became involved in the region several years after the war - to possess all the required knowledge of the events of 1992. The people who know best are those who were part of the ethnic cleansing campaign, both perpetrators and victims, but obviously it would be rather unusual to involve the perpetrators in commemorating it.

Patience: This is a big deal for Bosnia and should not be rushed. Experience in other countries and situations suggests that years, not months, may be realistic for such a project to fully develop. Only those with an interest in the memorial have that kind of patience, so we must look for a way to allow Mittal Steel to get the problem 'off their books' so that they can move on with developing their business. Leasing the site to survivors makes the most sense in this regard; that way they are not responsible for the project all the way through - they just create the conditions for it to happen.

Process

Project ownership: It is vital that survivors and the families of the missing are given ownership of the project for it to succeed. Once it is agreed they cacn have a memorial, then anything other than allowing them to shape it, build it and manage it would deny them the therapeutic benefits of a process that can help them come to terms with what happened to them. Rather than try to force local Serbs to sign up completely to the victims' point of view, by giving them a degree of control over the project, it is better for them that they just tolerate it as a necessary step and then only get involed in supporting the project and maintaining the memorial when they are ready.

Capacity building: This should be one of the main tasks of professional facilitators, rather than dividing people to achieve a quick fix to a complex issue. Bosniak returnees and the diaspora abroad perhaps lacked the capacity to consult on, design and implement a memorial when the project began; they could benefit from some assistance in funding and organising themselves into a structure that can run an Omarska Memorial. Instead, the process has made them less united and less clear about what they want than before.

Reconciliation: The 'R' word. Either the project is a memorial project or a reconciliation project. They are related but not the same. Experience of other situations suggests that commemoration should come first, and reconciliation can and will take place when the conditions are right, part of which means puncturing the bubble of denial that exists in Republika Srpska and engendering a real debate.

Design: It is for the project stakeholders to decide how the memorial should be implemented, and the design process should involve a combination of expert input from among the wider Bosniak community and public consultation among survivors and families of the missing. The ideas should nto be constrained by what the mediators think is 'do-able' given their view of the political or financial situation they are operating within.

Useful Links

Na Bosanskom

Background

The Memorial Project

The Debate

Issues for the Memorial Project

principles

Process