The CAA project is taking place in Plehan, in the Posavina region of northern BiH, which borders Croatia. Plehan falls within the Serb controlled part of BiH. Historically, Posavina has a large Croat population. During the war, the Serbs ethically cleansed the region of Croats. They also destroyed the St. Marko Monastery.
The United Nations Development Programme, which has been involved in attempting to return Croats to the area, has written an unusually sympathetic report. It points out the great significance Posavina has for Croats in BiH, Croatia and the Croatian Diaspora, referring to the "continuing breathing" between populations across the border.
However, refugee BiH Croats who fled to Croatia have little incentive to return. The conditions - economic, health care, education etc - are much better in Croatia than BiH. There are few employment possibilities in Posavina, never mind the implications of living in Republika Srpska; it is only relatively recently that Croats have been able to return safely.
Few have actually done so. In 1991, Plehan itself had 6,000 Croats; in 2003 it just had 161.
The CAA project in Plehan is geared to the micro level - a grass roots approach. A local who returned from Croatia is receiving CAA funds to build a store. Currently, there is no such store and locals have to be ferried to nearby towns for their supplies. Some of the profits will go into a community fund to expand the scheme.
A local, integrated approach - homes, churches, schools and employment are all needed for sustainable return. This is recognised by bodies such as UNDP. The CAA project is working on the same lines. If it works, then it can create an ongoing success. In so doing, it can bring attention to the Croat refugee return problem and put off any notion of stating that Annex VII has been realised.
Concerns were expressed to me in Sarajevo that Annex VII of the Dayton Accords - which deal with refugee return - may be declared to be fully realised. This would mean declaring that the refugee problem is effectively over, and no funds will remain for Croats who want to go home. This possibility is given credence by Paddy Ashdown's continued declarations on the success of refugee returns - conveniently not mentioning the failure of Croat returns. Unlike the Serbs and Bosniaks, Croats only started returning after 2000 rather than in 1995 - when the war ended.
The seriousness of the situation is demonstrated by figures from the Franciscan Bosna Srebrena Provincial. In the areas they administer there were 158,246 Croats in 2003 as opposed to 295,060 in 1991.
However, this does not mean the situation is hopeless. A new project funded by the Croatian American Association may help in returning Croats to their homes in BiH.
