{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.01778304682868998, 'fraction_numerical': 0.007113218731475993, 'mean_word_length': 5.138181818181818, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Return and Reconstruction in Bosnia-Herzegovina: Missing Link, or Mistaken Priority?

T return of refugees and “reconstruction” of countries devastated by conflict are important policy goals for an increasingly large number of donor governments, international organizations, and NGOs working across the development and humanitarian fields. Recent events in Kosovo provide a dramatic illustration of both the speed with which concern for reconstruction can develop and the extent to which this is linked in public policy to the return of refugees. Yet Kosovo is not the first, nor is it the only situation in which emphasis has been placed on the links between refugee return and post-conflict reconstruction. From Cambodia and Namibia in the early 1990s to Mozambique, Rwanda, and Guatemala in the middle part of the decade, policymakers have grappled with these twin concerns as fundamental components of international humanitarian policy. Nowhere has international commitment to refugee return and reconstruction been more evident than in the Balkans. In Bosnia in particular, the armed conflict of 1992-95 shocked the world. As the war ended, Western nations hoped to make Bosnia a showcase of their ability to lead a country out of war and into sustainable economic and social development. The task was considerable. Over half of the country’s estimated population of 3.5 million was either living outside the country as refugees or was internally displaced within its borders. The economy of the country lay shattered, while its political system had been dramatically altered, not only by the conflict, but also by the need to establish new forms of governance after the collapse of