Meaning: The quote by John Keegan, a renowned military historian, provides insight into his perspective on the conflict in Bosnia. In this quote, Keegan suggests that the situation in Bosnia is not solely driven by political motives, but also contains elements of atavism. To understand the significance of Keegan's statement, it is essential to delve into the historical and cultural context of Bosnia and the complex nature of the conflict that engulfed the region.

Bosnia and Herzegovina, located in the Balkans, has a long history of ethnic and religious diversity. The collapse of the former Yugoslavia in the early 1990s led to a devastating war in Bosnia, characterized by brutal ethnic and religious conflicts. The roots of the conflict can be traced back to historical tensions between different ethnic and religious groups, primarily the Bosnian Muslims (Bosniaks), Serbs, and Croats. These communities have coexisted in the region for centuries, but the dissolution of Yugoslavia reignited deep-seated animosities and territorial ambitions.

Keegan's use of the term "atavistic" in the quote is particularly noteworthy. Atavism refers to the reversion to ancestral or primitive behaviors, often associated with primal instincts and deep-seated emotions. In the context of the Bosnian conflict, Keegan seems to suggest that the violence and brutality witnessed in the region may be rooted in atavistic tendencies, transcending conventional political motivations. This implies that the conflict is not simply a product of contemporary political disputes, but rather a manifestation of deeply ingrained historical and cultural factors that have resurfaced in a brutal and primal manner.

Furthermore, Keegan's distinction between "partly political" and "partly atavistic" reflects the multifaceted nature of the Bosnian conflict. While political factors such as territorial disputes, power struggles, and competing nationalisms undoubtedly played a significant role, it is crucial to acknowledge the impact of historical grievances, collective memories of past conflicts, and the intergenerational transmission of trauma. The atrocities committed during the war, including ethnic cleansing, mass killings, and systematic rape, point to a level of violence that goes beyond mere political maneuvering.

The concept of atavism in the context of the Bosnian conflict also raises questions about the human capacity for savagery and the susceptibility of societies to descend into primal violence under certain conditions. It challenges the notion that modern societies have evolved beyond primitive impulses and underscores the enduring influence of historical legacies on contemporary conflicts.

In conclusion, John Keegan's quote offers a thought-provoking perspective on the nature of the conflict in Bosnia. By highlighting the atavistic elements intertwined with political dynamics, Keegan draws attention to the deep-seated historical and cultural dimensions of the Bosnian war. His words prompt us to critically examine the complex interplay of factors that underpin conflicts, and to consider the enduring impact of historical legacies on contemporary events. Understanding the profound implications of Keegan's insight is essential for comprehending the complexities of conflicts such as the one that unfolded in Bosnia and Herzegovina.