Forgiveness and Memory

·

Running Head: FORGIVENESS AND MEMORY

Forgiveness and Memory in Mostar: Bridging the Stari Most

Susan James

May, 2010

LI860XI: Memory Institutions in a Modern Society

Professor Marta Deyrup

Emporia State University

I'm still alive. In Sarajevo.

For now that means: living in the past.

To talk of the future means: to dream.

A white paper is my final home

whereas my pencil is my religion.

Sometimes I want to exchange the graphite with gun powder.

Goran Simic. Bosnian poet.

From the "Mourning of Sarajevo" Journal

In the former Yugoslavian country now known as Bosnia-Herzegovina, the Stari Most (Old Bridge) of Mostar was built during the Ottoman era. Commissioned by Suleiman the Magnificent in 1557, it took famed architect Mimar Hayreddin nine years to complete the structure, which spans the cerulean blue-green Neretva River. Flanked by the fortified Halebija Tower on the right bank and the Tara Tower on the left, the Stari Most connected a burgeoning multicultural community and became the namesake for Mostar: mostari means “the bridge keepers.” After uniting Mostar’s inhabitants for over five centuries, the Stari Most fell under attack during the Bosnian War and on November 9, 1993, was utterly destroyed by Croatian army tank bombardment in less than 30 minutes. The literal and symbolic loss of the Stari Most left the people of Mostar separated and hostile, suffering a bitter experience from which they appear still not capable of forgiving or forgetting.

After Bosnia-Herzegovina declared independence from Yugoslavia in 1992, Mostar suffered an 18 month siege by the Yugoslav People's Army. Over the next two years, factions including the Croatian Defense Council and Army of the Republic of Bosnia and Herzegovina returned fire, with countless buildings and structures suffering significant damage, if not complete destruction. Churches, mosques, shrines, and synagogues all fell in ruins, however the Stari Most may have represented the greatest symbolic loss of all: the long standing connection between the Croats west of the Neretva and the Muslims on the east was irreparably severed, sending a powerful message that the old days of peaceful cohabitation were at an end. A UNESCO observer wrote that while the Stari Most was only one of many outstanding cultural properties that were systematically destroyed during the 1990’s Balkan wars, the extremists “seeking to obliterate the cultural roots of their society considered the bridge to be the last powerful symbol of living together, and destroyed it for this reason” (Matsuura). During the hostilities, a journalist reported that “as a precarious cease-fire held in central Bosnia, the bridge, festooned with old automobile tires in a gallant attempt to protect it from the ravages of shell and mortar fire, stood in testimony to the most fervent hope of the trapped citizens of this shattered town -- that somehow the yawning gap between war and peace can be bridged and life allowed to resume again” (Under Siege). Regrettably, the attack succeeded, collapsing the bridge along with any vestigial hope for reconciliation. Afterward, Croatian journalist Slavenka Drakulic attempted to explain the loss of the bridge in this way: "Why do we feel more pain looking at the image of the destroyed bridge (in Mostar) than the image of the massacred people? Perhaps because we see our own mortality in the collapse of the bridge. We expect people to die; we count on our lives to end. The destruction of a monument to civilization is something else. The bridge, in all its beauty and grace was built to outlive us. It was an attempt to grasp eternity. It transcended our individual destiny."

Rebuilding the Stari MostIn 1995, the Dayton peace agreement established the important peace-keeping role of rebuilding cultural heritage sites damaged by war, and the Stari Most, along with its surrounding historic neighborhood, was scheduled for reconstruction. This effort was viewed as more than simply “restoring communication in a physical sense” but was also considered vital to renew “connections with the past and between the communities of Mostar.” UNESCO also believed with the rebirth of the Old Bridge, “the symbolic power and meaning of the City of Mostar - as an exceptional and universal symbol of coexistence of communities from diverse cultural, ethnic and religious backgrounds - has been reinforced and strengthened, underlining the unlimited efforts of human solidarity for peace and powerful co-operation in the face of overwhelming catastrophes” (Balic).

With the aid of such countries as Italy, Turkey, France, and the Netherlands, various local and international organizations worked together to reconstruct the Stari Most in 1994. The rebuilding process took a decade to complete and, when ultimately restored, was celebrated in an inauguration ceremony on July 23, 2004. Delegates from 52 counties attended the powerfully emotional event, and a journalist described what was, for him, the apex of the celebration: “For me, the most important highlight was the joint singing appeal of both Croatian and Bosnian children of Mostar. Standing on a rock under the illuminated Old Bridge, a three-year-old Croatian boy led the choir into a powerful song: "Samo da rata ne bude" (Let there be no war)” (Balic).

In direct contrast to the celebration’s theme of unity and reconciliation, a darker subtext was observed by others. Writer Harry De Quetteville, who also attended the event, wrote “Despite all the words from the great and the good yesterday, few were willing to forgive and certainly none had forgotten the brutality of the 1993 conflict.” Soon afterward, two small stone monuments with the words “Don’t forget” were prominently displayed on both ends of the bridge, making it clear the inhabitants of Mostar wished the Stari Most’s destruction to remain in the forefront of people’s memory. Monuments such as these, however small, have tremendous psychological impact and influence on Mostar’s cultural memory.

The Purpose of Monuments and Memorials

Monuments are more than structures created to commemorate events which are important to a social group, or as vehicles for remembrance. Monuments may also convey political information and be used to reinforce current political power structures. Monuments may also be used to educate citizens about important historical events, however they rarely have fixed connotations and differing social groups may contest their meanings entirely. A memorial, like a monument, may also be a physical manifestation which fosters the remembrance of significant events. Gravestones are common examples, as are war memorials, both of which seem to aptly describe the “Don’t Forget” stones upon the Stari Most.

American artist Robert Smithson once said “Instead of causing us to remember the past like the old monuments, the new monuments seem to cause us to forget the future.” It can be argued that the “Don’t Forget” stones are causing Mostar’s inhabitants to be unable to remember the unified and peaceful future they once imagined. The very word “Monument” acts as a liminal bridge between remembering the past and looking toward the future: deriving from the Latin monere, it means 'to remind' and also 'to warn.' Perhaps the stones serve both purposes; to remind Mostarians of the suffering and destruction they have endured, and yet warn them that these events may occur again if a profound and abiding change does not occur.

According to Islamic bibliographer Andras Riedlmayer, he sees several issues at work regarding the purposeful display of the “Don’t Forget” monuments in the specific context of Mostar and Bosnia-Herzegovina. “The first is the impulse to affirm what happened (to you, your group, your city) and to seek recognition of that wrong, to preserve it from being forgotten -- and also to actively contest ongoing efforts by other parties who seek to deny, minimize or distort what was done and/or who was responsible for it.” Riedlmayer believes what makes these monuments both poignant and divisive is that there is still no commonly agreed-upon narrative of the 1990’s wars, and many of those responsible have yet to face justice. He explains that 15 years after the shooting stopped, war crimes trials addressing the Stari Most’s destruction are still underway, e.g., the UN war crimes tribunal in The Hague, and the War Crimes Chamber of the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Riedlmayer also believes motivations behind these memorials operate simultaneously at multiple levels. Bosniak, Croatian, and Serbian nationalists all seek to demonstrate their own group's victim status and to assign the greater responsibility for damage to the other factions. He affirms there are “ordinary people,” and the institutions they work in, who may be willing to forgive, to cooperate across ethnic lines, and even to work together in the same place, while still upholding a strong desire to honor and maintain the memory of what happened to their institutions and colleagues during the war. The Dzemal Bijedic University serves as one example: the university is situated on the eastern side of Mostar and has a largely Bosniak faculty and student body, however there are Croatian and Serbian scholars serving as Deans, faculty, and staff.

Finally, Riedlmayer points out that memorials may operate as tools for fund-raising, especially for institutions struggling to keep donors' interest as the focus moves to other world disasters. Some Mostar residents may also use memorialization as a way of making a living, and he mentions a small museum on the eastern end of the Stari Most that sells postcards and photo books to tourists, documenting the destruction of the very bridge they are standing upon.

Monuments as Barriers to Forgiveness

Forgiveness is a psychological construct which religious perspectives heavily influence . In Michael McCullough’s seminal work on forgiveness, he explains it is “an act of pardon or release from an injury, offense, or debt” which Christianity encourages without expectations of recompense or a call for retribution (20). The Islamic perspective on forgiveness, however, teaches “a middle path between turning the other cheek and never ending a blood feud, that is, revenge to the extent harm done is allowed” (31). Forgiveness, at least for some, allows for continued acts of vengeance against an enemy, and certain Mostar citizens may be prime exemplars of such beliefs.

McCullough’s work also describes barriers to forgiveness which seem applicable to Mostar’s residents, especially considering they were once peaceful cohabitants for generations: “the violation has been directly caused by an intimate partner, leading to greater feelings of interpersonal loss and hurt, as well as painful attributions of responsibility and intentional malice toward the participating partner. As long as the injured partners do not have a clear sense of why the trauma occurred, they cannot trust their partners not to hurt them again; instead, the partners are likely to be seen as malicious individuals whose very faces or voices serve as stimuli for floods of painful emotion. Unfortunately, the participating partner often is dealing with his or her own feelings of guilt, shame, anger, or depression, and thus is often ill-equipped to respond effectively” (italics mine, 215).

Bridging the Stari Most Chasm

The bridge has been rebuilt for fifteen years now, but Mostar is not the same city it once was. According to one article on UNESCO’s website, “in the cities of Bosnia and Herzegovina, a common civic identity was destroyed, and along with it, the “other” inside the people. In Bosnia and Herzegovina, the impoverishment of the post-war cities is appalling, not simply because they are largely emptied of another ethnic group or of great sacral buildings. The surviving buildings, even intact, are simply ghosts from another age: the “other” has been eliminated at all levels, inside people and outside on the streets” (Crimes against Culture). A reporter for The Herald observed that although the bridge has been rebuilt, Mostar remains divided between the Croat western half and the Muslim eastern half, and that Muslim and Croat children are still segregated, attending separate schools split along ethnic lines. Writer Andrew Purvis concurs, explaining that the people living on either side of the Stari Most still lead “largely separate lives, attending their own schools and hospitals, even throwing their garbage in separate dumps.” He makes the final observation that while the Stari Most took a decade to rebuild, “spanning the human divide will take longer still.” How Mostar’s people will cross that divide toward forgiveness, especially when faced with the stones continuing reproach to never forget, remains to be seen.

Bibliography

Balic, Admirela. (2004). "The new 'Old Bridge': a story from Mostar." UN Chronicle. Global Issues In Context. Web. 2 Apr. 2010.

Bosnian Institute. (2004). Wartime destruction/post-war reconstruction. http://www.bosnia.org.uk/bosnia/viewtype.cfm?typeID=349

Council of Europe. (1993). War damage to the cultural heritage in Croatia and Bosnia-Herzegovina presented by the Committee on Culture and Education. Second information report. http://assembly.coe.int/Documents/WorkingDocs/Doc93/EDOC6869.htm

De Quetteville, Harry. (2004). "Prince watches post-war Bosnia rebuild bridges." Daily Telegraph. London, England. Global Issues In Context. Web. 4 Apr. 2010.

The Hague. Destruction of cultural heritage in Bosnia-Herzegovina. http://hague.bard.edu/reports/BosHeritageReport-AR.pdf

The Herald. (2004). Bridging divide in war-torn city; Mostar celebrates rebuilding tolerance. Herald [Glasgow, Scotland]. Global Issues In Context. Web. 16 Apr. 2010.

Matsuura, K. (2004). "Why we need the old bridge at Mostar." International Herald Tribune Online. http://www.iht.com/articles/528168.html

McCullough, M. (2000). Forgiveness: theory, research and practice. New York. Guilford Press.

Purvis, Andrew. (2004). "Building bridges." Time International [Europe Edition]. Global Issues In Context. Web. 2 Apr. 2010.

Riedlmayer, A. (2010). Personal correspondence with S. James.

Riedlmayer, A. (1994). Killing memory: Bosnia’s cultural heritage and its destruction. Video.

Riedlmayer, A., and S. Naron. (2009). "From Yizkor Books to Weblogs: Genocide, Grassroots Documentation, and New Technologies." Chapter included in Community Archives: The Shaping of Memory, ed. by Jeannette A. Bastian and Ben Alexander. London. Facet Publishing. 151-163.

Simic, G. Sarajevo Poetry. http://www.leftcurve.org/lc18-20pgs/aftersarajevo.html

Slyomovics, S. (1998). The Object of memory: Arab and Jew narrate the Palestinian village.Philadelphia. University of Pennsylvania Press.

Smithson, Robert. (1996), Flam, Jack D., ed. Robert Smithson: The collected writings. Berkeley. University of California Press

Under siege. (1993). Time. Global Issues In Context. Web. 8 Apr. 2010.

UNESCO. (2000). Crimes Against Culture. http://www.unesco.org/courier/2000_09/uk/signe2.htm

War Crimes Chamber of the State Court of Bosnia and Herzegovina. http://www.sudbih.gov.ba/?jezik=e