Vanderbilt Political Review Fall 2015 | Page 9

FALL 2015 of 1992 to 1995. It was only recently that the Bosnian government publicly acknowledged and apologized for the past. Institutionalized structure that sanctions violence is conditioned by the societal norms that precede it. The violent environment legitimizes feelings of fear, hatred, and iniquitous subjugation. Though the combat concluded with the Dayton Peace Accords, the casualties of the Bosnian War extend far past the death count. The war conceded to the rape and abuse of 50,000 women. These widowed women, sonless mothers, and orphaned children are the survivors of the Bosnian Genocide. Twenty years ago, the world held its breath as Bosnia began its path of reconstruction. The chosen direction would be what characterized negotiation efforts and the effectiveness of enforcement. With the nation’s past colored by the troubles surrounding Yugoslavia and the decision on whether or not to stay in the Yugoslav Federation to then the inefficiency of the multilateral administration of Bosnia-Herzegovina, collaborative recovery seemed near impossible let alone peaceful reconciliation. With so many either displaced or dead, violence persisted within refugee camps and the harrowing effects of living in constant fear during wartime. Bosnia is notorious for its despondency, stemming from decentralization and the redistribution of loyalty along ethnic lines, only heightening the prejudice between Muslims, Croats, and Serbs. There was such doubt that the International Crisis Group even stated, “Bosnia remains unready for unguided ownership of its own future-ethnic nationalism remains too strong.” To the astonishment of the international community, the legacy of the 1995 human rights abomination became one distinguished by restorative compassion. Though the women of Srebrenica serve as living symbols of violence due to the gross experiences they suffered, they chose DOMESTIC to become transformative agents of change with once enemies joining together in unbelievable solidarity as recounted by Queen Noor of Jordan: They have refused to abandon the pursuit of justice, and they have refused to descend to the level of the men who murdered their fathers and husbands and sons: they have refused to hate. Instead, as I have witnessed, they have met with Serb and Croat women as they struggled together to come to terms with the deaths of their husbands, sons and fathers - killed, in some cases, perhaps by the husbands or sons of women sitting across the table. Bosnia lost a critical generation of influencers with no replaceable equivalent. This rattled the nation’s successive course significantly and yielded instead to a particular social climate characterized by the community of survivors able to actively facilitate the future. The conflict response by these women set the precedent for the country’s post-conflict culture. Though intergenerational trauma states that the psychological impacts of trauma are passed down, the survivor’s strength is also transferrable. Subsequent generations, who did not directly experience the wake of war, will undoubtedly build context based on the limited testimonies of the living. Despite a history of immense suffering that warrants angry retribution, these individuals are products conditioned ultimately by forgiveness. As showcased by the incredible strength of Bosnian Muslim women, survivors have the power of shaping the narrative and the extent of how much destructive evil will carry over into their response. The women of Srebrenica did not allow their abuse to predetermine the fate of Bosnia and Herzegovina. They did not let rape translate into rape culture. And neither can we. Two events, Bosnia and Vanderbilt that fall eighteen years apart, both attest to the disturbing truth behind oppression. There are two distinct identities in this story – that of the persecutor and the victim. Despite the heart-wrenching anguish and reactive resolutions that swore never again, the narrative of violence continues. However, there is something to learn. The memorials for the dead and atrocities endured by those who suffered are in vain if the culture that permits injustice and contempt actively pervades. The ongoing system that authorizes dehumanization without consequence is blatant disregard towards the warning issued by their lived experiences. Our responses to conflict are immediate, not transformative. Though the veneer argues that actionable measures are being taken with the Campus Sexual Violence Elimination Act or the United Nation’s International Criminal Tribunal for the former Yugoslavia despite the reality of delayed convictions, the false satisfaction found in awareness-building and the security behind cosmetic requital is the ultimate disappointment. A national amendment to require university responsibility in thoroughly recording incidents, protecting confidentiality, and providing resources for trauma healing must not be mistaken as the conclusive solution. With one-dimensional programming responses misdirected, the objectives and subsequent impact assessments are invalid and meaningless. Vanderbilt University cannot boast success with Gr