Bosnia, 1992–95
in Framing post-Cold War conflicts
Abstract only
Log-in for full text

You are not authenticated to view the full text of this chapter or article.

manchesterhive requires a subscription or purchase to access the full text of books or journals - to see content that you/your institution should have access to, please log in through your library system or with your personal username and password.

If you are authenticated and think you should have access to this title, please contact your librarian.

Non-subscribers can freely search the site, view abstracts/extracts and download selected front and end matter. 

Institutions can purchase access to individual titles; please contact manchesterhive@manchester.ac.uk for pricing options.

ACCESS TOKENS

If you have an access token for this content, you can redeem this via the link below:

Redeem token

Recognition of Bosnian independence in 1992 followed the secession of the republics of Croatia and Slovenia from the federal Yugoslav state the previous year. The accusations and counter-accusations of bias among both reporters and analysts of the Bosnian war can sometimes become exaggerated because of a fundamental disagreement about the legitimacy of Western intervention in the post-Cold War world. Susan Woodward identifies two competing views of the causes of the Bosnian war, both of which informed the policies of Western governments. First understood it as an 'ethnic' conflict, arising from longstanding mutual antagonisms which had been given free rein with the end of the Cold War. Second explained the war as the result of Serbia's aggressive territorial ambitions. Woodward argues that Western accusations of war crimes were 'a servant of American policy toward the conflict'.

Framing post-Cold War conflicts

The media and international intervention

Metrics

All Time Past Year Past 30 Days
Abstract Views 137 53 3
Full Text Views 49 7 0
PDF Downloads 12 7 0