Author: Khushboo Chauhan (Bengaluru, Karnataka, India)
This essay aims to understand the role of the concepts of populism and nationalism by shedding light on how these two have emerged resulting in conflict in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Nationalism as a discourse is focused around the notion of “the nation” whereas populism is structured around antagonism against “the elite”, who are considered as a small illegitimate powerful group and the populists who claim to represent “the people” (Cleen,2017). We are witnessing a global rise of populist nationalism around the globe, from America to Asia to Europe. Undoubtedly, it is a scary uprising as both waves of populism and nationalism have the potential to polarize both people and politics.
If we look into the history of any of the great power crimes, whether a war crime or ethnic cleansing or genocide we will realise nationalism or populism is the central theme that binds all these crimes quite often. The powerful perpetrators of almost majority of these crimes have always held the belief in the identity of “us” and “them” while targeting their victims. The conquest of nations around the world and the extermination of it’s indigenous people has been carried out over many centuries in the name of identity. The powerful and dominating institutions of today maybe more complex than their predecessors of centuries or decades ago but there is no denying the fact that they work no differently than the ones founded before them.
Habermas (1994) defines nationalism as a specifically modern phenomenon of cultural integration but further goes on to say that mobilization and isolation of individuals lends nationalism the artificial traits of something that to a certain extent is a construct. Hence, it is susceptible to manipulative misuse by political elites by its very definition. Some thinkers argue that nationalism is a melting pot which depends on notions of citizenship and patriotism. Anderson (2003) argues that nationalism can also be perceived as an “imagined community”. Nationalism is a social construction which includes inclusions and exclusions based on history and notions of citizenship and national belonging. Some scholars believe that the idea that the state and the nation came into being at the same time has not been found to be true because a nation is a concept that is often conceived or constructed by the state. It was always impossible for nations to come into being first because of the diversity among the masses, Bosnia and Herzegovina being one such example whose diversity is well known. Hence, the modern nations only emerged because the modern state came into being. Now, it becomes essential to clarify as to how the concept of state was formed in order to comprehend the idea of nationalism.
Scholars like B. Parekh (1999) warn that “defining national identity in a multicultural society is an exceedingly difficult enterprise”. According to him it is difficult as a dominant group which tends to identify itself with the country may try to appropriate it’s own identity on the nation itself as can be observed in many countries around the world. Hence, it becomes essential that “the definition of national identity should not only include all citizens but also accept them as equally valued and legitimate members of the community”. Scholars view both populism and nationalism as a cause of both international and internal conflicts. Hannah Arendt’s (1970) work “On Violence” is undoubtedly her most relevant work to understand conflict especially contemporary conflict. Her reexamination of the relationship between war, politics, violence and power undoubtedly provides the ideal theoretical framework for understanding the turbulence of the contemporary times.
On the other hand, populism is a widely used highly debated term. It has been defined based on political, economic, social, and discursive features (Weyland, 2001). Populism becomes more important in the current times due to the rise in it’s role in contemporary democracies around the world. Ionescu and Gellner tried to define populism (1969) as:
There can, at present, be no doubt about the importance of populism. But no one is quite clear just what it is. As a doctrine or as a movement, it is elusive and protean. It bobs up everywhere, but in many and contradictory shapes. Does it have any underlying unity? Or does one name cover a multitude of unconnected tendencies?
Further, Cass Mudde (2004) studied populism by focusing on right wing parties in Europe. He remarked:
[Populism is] a thin-centered ideology that considers society to be ultimately separated into two homogenous and antagonistic groups, ‘the pure people’ versus ‘the corrupt elite,’ and which argues that politics should be an expression of the volonté générale (general will) of the people.
These definitions are just a glimpse of the different ways in which the concept of populism is understood and defined. They also portray the confusion and the support the belief as to how susceptible are people to misunderstand such a multi-faceted concept. Undoubtedly, it has and will lead to conflicts around the world due to various connotations attached to it. Hence, this is a dangerous tool in the hands of political leaders around the world and Bosnia and Herzegovina makes a good example of observing the repercussions of the misinterpretation of the concept of populism to one’s advantage by the political machinery.
The world is not oblivious to the formation of nation-states and multi-national empires and not even to the dark times of rise of populism and nationalism which result in conflict. It was in the 1990s that some pertinent questions of populism, nationalism and conflict arose in many parts of Europe due to certain political developments such as in the year of 1992 when the government of the Yugoslav Republic of Bosnia-Herzegovina declared it’s independence from Yugoslavia. For the next several years this development resulted in the Bosniak (Bosnian Muslims) and Croatian Civilians suffering severe crimes at the hands of the Bosnian Serb Forces, backed by the Serb dominated Yugoslav Army. Recent political developments in Bosnia are a similar example of populism that has or is taking hold in countries like USA and Russia recently. In such circumstance, political leaders “trumps…..all other sources of legitimate political authority, be it constitutional court, head of state, parliament, or local and state government”(Newsweek,2017).
There are numerous reasons given by the scholars for the rise of nationalism and populism in a society. If we concentrate on Bosnia and Herzegovina, the foremost reason is the breaking up of the Soviet Union. Secondly, you will also find scholars who support the notion that the region was bound to witness conflict of some humungous proportions due to the prevalent historical hatred among the Serbs, Bosniaks and the Croats. Thirdly, you also have certain scholars who put forth the argument that this conflict is a result of the purposely-constructed nationalism by some political leaders, who in order to divert the attention of the common people from their economic woes used the discourse.
Whenever we talk about conflict, especially genocides, the Holocaust over these decades has become synonymous to it. It is viewed as the “benchmark of evil”. One of the most disturbing question that has over the years arisen while studying the Holocaust is that how did the common public become a part of this sinister plan? A very similar issue arises in this case as well. Regardless, of the above reasons, we do need to find out, as the scholars have not tried to find answers to the question such as the reasons behind this rapid rise of nationalism among the general public which moved towards conflict or violence so smoothly within a couple of years. What is it that made the general population of this region so susceptible to the negative connotations of both populism and nationalism? It is important to find answers to these questions if we want to prevent the repetition of such conflicts in the future.
As countries around the world struggle with the rise of populism and nationalism working as divisive forces, Bosnia and Herzegovina offer it a dark lesson. It was only a couple of decades ago that this region witnessed fear and fighting that sabotaged their peace and harmony for years to come. These happenings nearly resulted in questioning of Bosnia’s existence as a country. It became a prime example of showing how dangerous ethno nationalism and populism can be. This extreme brand of nationalism and populism combined, makes Bosnia and Herzegovina remain in a volatile condition even today. It is high time that both the people and the political powers realize that to bring peace and prosperity to this region, it is essential to exile these dangerous notions of both nationalism and populism.
Trying to understand the rise of populism or nationalism in countries around the world, whether in the past or the current times is essential, even though it cannot bring back the dead from the graves nor can it heal the wounds of the survivors, nor can it dull the pain of the displaced, nor can it bring back the trust lost among the citizens of a nations nor can it bring back the money spent. The citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina are and will have to live the repercussions of these conflicts for years to come and that is where this course steps in. To make people and political leaders around the world know and understand as to what rise of uncontrolled and misplaced concept of populism and nationalism can lead to, so that they do not undermine these dangerous narratives in their own countries. To make them realize that political actions taken for political gains can lead to such destruction that cannot be undone for centuries to come. The concepts of both nationalism and populism are dynamic. Sometimes they may lead to revolutions which bring along independence, rights and liberties for people shackled by the chains of repression and exploitation and sometimes they turn peaceful and prosperous societies into perpetrators of the innocent who end up indulging in unspeakable crimes.
Resources (Made available during the course by the Academy):
Balibar, E. (2017). ‘Populism’ and ‘counter-populism’ in the Atlantic mirror. Open Democracy.
Bojanić-Savić, M., & Repovac Nikšić, V. (2019). “How We Understand Populism?” Popular Responses to Populist Politics in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Sociological Problems, (Special Issue), 291–311.
Deiwiks, C. (2009). Populism in Living Reviews in Democracy. Center for Comparative and International Studies. ETH Zurich and University of Zurich.
Frank, J. (2018). Populism Isn’t the Problem. Boston Review.
Hameleers, M. (2018). A Typology of Populism: Toward a Revised Theoretical Framework on the Sender Side and Receiver Side of Communication. International Journal of Communication 12 (2018), 2171-2190.
Heinisch, R. C., Holtz-Bacha, C., Mazzoleni, O. (eds.) (2017). Political Populism. A Handbook. Nomos.
Džananović, N., & Karamehić, M. (2017). Bosnia and Herzegovina: Populism in Transition. In Routledge Research in Communication Studies. Populist Political Communication in Europe (pp. 263–273). Routledge.
Ghergina, S., Miscoiu, S., Soare, S. (eds.) (2013). Contemporary Populism – A Controversial Concept and Its Diverse Forms. Cambridge Scholar Publishing.
Hromadžić, A. (2013). Discourses of trans-ethnic narod in postwar Bosnia and Herzegovina. Nationalities papers: The Journal of Nationalism and Ethnicity. https://doi.org/10.1080/00905992.2012.747503 .
Kapferer, B., Theodossopoulos, D. (eds.) (2019). Democracy’s Paradox: Populism and its Contemporary Crisis. New York/Oxford: Berghahn Books.
Kurtović, L. (2018). Conjuring ‘the People’: The 2013 Babylution Protests and Desire for Political Transformation in Postwar Bosnia-Herzegovina. Focaal 2018 (80): 43–62.
Mouffe, Ch. (2018). For a Left Populism. London, New York: Verso Books.
Mudde, C. (2004). The Populist Zeitgeist. Government and Opposition 39 (4), 541-63.
Taggart P. (2002). Populism and the Pathology of Representative Politics. In: Mény Y., Surel Y. (eds.) Democracies and the Populist Challenge. Palgrave Macmillan, London
Tamas, G. M. (2017). The mystery of ‘populism’ finally unveiled. open Democracy.
https://www.opendemocracy.net/en/can-europe-make-it/mystery-of-populism-finally-unveiled/
Additions:
Anderson, Benedict. Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism. London: Verso. 2003.
Arendt, Hannah. On Violence. 1970.
Armstrong, J.: Nations Before Nationalism. Chapel Hill, University of North Carolina Press, 1982.
Ayyash, M. The paradox of political violence. European Journal of Social Theory .Vol. 16 pp.342-356. 2013.
Blokker, Paul. Populist Nationalism, Anti-Europeanism, Nationalism, and the East-West Distinction. Special Issue Confronting Memories—Anti-European Europeanism: The Rise of Populism. German Law Journal. 6(2): 371-389. 2005
Breuilly, John. Nationalism and the State. Manchester: Manchester University Press. 1993
Brubaker, Roger. Nationalism Reframed. Nationhood and the National Question in the New Europe. Cambridge. Cambridge University Press.
Canovan, Margaret. Nationhood and Political Theory. Cheltenham. Edward Elgar. 2005.
De Cleen, Benjamin and Yannis Stavrakakis.Distinctions and Articulations: A Discourse Theoretical Framework for the Study of Populism and Nationalism. Javnost—The Public 24(4). 2017.
Gellner, E. Nations and Nationalism. Oxford, Blackwell, 1983.
Giddens, A. The Nation-State and Violence. Cambridge, Polity Press, 1985.
Greenfeld, L. Nationalism. Cambridge, Mass., University of Harvard Press, 1992.
Guimaraes, Samuel Pinheiro. Nation, Nationalism, State. Estudos Avancados. Vol 22 No. 62. January/April. 2008.
Habermas, Jurgen. Citizenship and National Identity in Bart Van Steenbergen (ed.). The Condition of Citizenship. Sage Publications. London. 1994.
Hawkins, Kirk. Madeleine Read and Teun Pauwels. Theories of Populism.2016.
Ionescu, Ghita, and Ernst Gellner, eds. Populism: Its Meanings and National Characteristics. New York: Macmillan. 1969.
Mullin, Rachel, "Media Manipulation or Economic Decline? Explaining the Rise of Nationalism within Bosnia Herzegovina" (2014). Honors Theses, 1963-2015, 737. Accessed at https://digitalcommons.csbsju.edu/honors_theses/737.
Mudde, Cas and Cristóbal Rovira Kaltwasser. Populism. In M. Freeden, L. T. Sargent, & M. Stears (eds). The Oxford Handbook of Political Ideologies. Oxford: Oxford University Press. 493-512. 2013.
Mudde, Cas. The Populist Zeitgeist. Government and Opposition. 541-563. 2004.
Parekh, B. Defining national identity in a multicultural society in E. Mortimer (ed.). People, Nation and State. London. Edward Arnold Ltd. 1973.
Rogers Brubaker. Why Populism?. Theory and Society: 1-29.2017.
Smith, Anthony D. Nationalism. Theory, Ideology, History. Cambridge. Polity. 2001.
Weyland, Kurt. 2001. ‘Clarifying a Contested Concept: Populism in the Study of Latin American Politics’, Comparative Politics, Vol. 34 (1), pp. 1-22.
