The European Union has won a significant battle by persuading the Croats in Mostar to swallow their pride and sign the agreement to set up a city government based on the disputed election in June. The deadlock over the issue symbolised the intransigence that has to be overcome throughout Bosnia if the Dayton agreements are to be turned into reality. If the malign scenado of continuing Croat resistance had frustrated agreement, that fragile process would have begun to unravel, beginning with next month's all Bosnian election. As it was, the EU had to resort to its, traditional practice of stopping the clock ignoring a previously set deadline to accommodate the Croat negotiators.
What caused their change of heart is not yet clear. Undoubtedly, the prospect of a withdrawal of the EU presence, with all that was implied in terms of local stability, was a powerful consideration, allied with heavy pressure from the international community. But that can only be a small part of the story. The short sharp war between Moslems and Croats in Mostar two years ago has helped to entrench support for the concept of Greater Croatia and the formation of a separate Croat republic running counter to the Dayton philosophy of ethnic integration. The passions aroused by that conflict have not yet subsided in, either community, and are likely to overshadow the work of the unified city council for several years.
On the practical side, deep divisions have developed between east and west Mostar which will be no less easy to eradicate. One part of the city uses Bosnian dinars and reads newspapers and watches television emanating from Sarajevo, the other uses Croatian currency and is informed by the Zagreb media. The multi ethnic culture that was the result of centuries of living together may not have been totally destroyed by the cataclysmic events of the last five years, but forceful new interests have come into play which threaten its restoration. Croat irredentism may have helped to delay agreement on local government but the criminal elements who have profited from war are also opposed to any political settlement.
These, one can be certain, have not been appeased by the decision to accept the result of the election at the end of June subject to a face saving appeal by the Croats to the Bosnian constitutional court on its validity and choose a mayor and deputy mayor at a meeting of the council tomorrow. There will be, as the French foreign minister, Mr de Charette, said yesterday, a need for extreme vigilance in overseeing the practical application of the agreement. A number of minor violent incidents in the hours before it was reached underlined the perilous nature of the current political climate and the doubts that can be legitimately held about the agreement's future.
So much depends on the situation in Mostar, however, that the avoidance of the abyss, by the slimmest of margins, is a matter for profound relief. Progress in Bosnia is bound to be slow and dependent on the patient support of international agencies until the necessary confidence has been developed on the ground together with a sense of how far ambitions inflated in times of war must be curtailed to bring about the peace. That day has been brought a little nearer by the Mostar agreement, but it is still a long way off.