Internal politics powered by ethnonationalism and the threat of war have become common on both sides of Bosnia-Herzegovina’s increasingly apparent divide, further encouraged by foreign supporter states.
In 2016, Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) submitted its membership application to the European Union and has since made some progress in the accession process. However, the country’s internal political situation, particularly the complex governance structure spawned by the Bosnian War, has posed obstacles to the accession negotiations. The crisis that intensified in 2021 between the Republika Srpska and the state leadership subsided in 2022 and in December 2022 the European Council finally granted Bosnia and Herzegovina candidate status.1 The European Union has urged the new candidate country to urgently proceed on its path towards EU membership and to implement key reforms and commitments to start accession negotiations.2
The territory of Bosnia and Herzegovina has historically been a crossroads of different cultures, religions, and great power interests. Its location in the Western Balkans has made it a meeting point between East and West, bringing both prosperity and conflicts. The rich historical heritage has created a multiethnic and multireligious mosaic in the region, where the people of Bosnia and Herzegovina, mainly Orthodox Serbs, Catholic Croats, and Muslim Bosniaks, have lived side by side for centuries, adapting to cross-pressures.
Throughout the 20th century, great power breakup wars and nationalist movements escalated ethnic tensions into sometimes bloody conflicts, the most recent and tragic being the Bosnian War. The Dayton Peace Agreement, mediated by the United States in 1995, ended the war and established the current state structure and constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
The Dayton Agreement divided the country into two political entities: the Federation of Bosnia and Herzegovina, inhabited mainly by Bosniaks and Croats, and the Serb-majority Republika Srpska, governed jointly by three presidents representing each nationality. While the agreement ended the violence, it also entrenched the country’s ethnic diversity into regional divisions.
The implementation of the agreement is overseen by the international community’s High Representative, who has authority over the country’s complex and exceptionally large administrative system. Additionally, the democratic system has been burdened with numerous internal locks and consensus requirements among nationalities, hindering reform efforts.
In 2021, the former High Representative Valentin Inzko reported to the UN Security Council that the division created post-agreement had essentially turned into a frozen conflict, where nationalist politicians continue to pursue wartime objectives.3 This is most evident in the Republika Srpska, where President Milorad Dodik has refused to acknowledge the Srebrenica genocide and repeatedly threatened to secede from the federation.
However, internal politics powered by ethnonationalism and the threat of war have become common on both sides of Bosnia-Herzegovina’s increasingly apparent divide, further encouraged by foreign supporter states.4 5 Despite their politicians, most people have learned to live in their daily lives intertwined and alongside each other – not necessarily together, but also not in open conflict.
SAMUEL TAMMEKANN
1 | Eurooppa-neuvosto. 2022. “Eurooppa-neuvoston kokous (15. joulukuuta 2022) – Päätelmät.” EUCO 34/22.
2 | The European Council. 2023. “Bosnia ja Hertsegovina.” 20.7.2023.
3 | The UN Security Council. 2021. “Bosnia and Herzegovina Remains in Effect ‘a Frozen Conflict’ as Political Leaders Push Nationalistic Agendas, High Representative Tells Security Council.” UN Press,
4.5.2021.
4 | Neven Anđelić. 2023. ”Nations in Transit 2023: Bosnia and Herzegovina.“ Freedom House.
5 | Taina Tervonen. 2022. “Bosnian uusi hajoamissota on aina lähellä.” Ulkopolitiikka, 2022(1).
Bilateral disputes: Tensions with Serbia, including the recognition of the Srebrenica genocide and war crimes trials.
Ethnically divided state: Disagreements between Bosniak, Croat, and Serb parties have led to a political impasse in the complex federation.
External political pressures: Challenges arise particularly from the Republika Srpska’s foreign policy orientation towards Serbia – and the sanctions against Russia the entity president Milorad Dodik has deliberately blocked through his veto power.
Economic growth: Economic integration and free movement of labour may cause new issues, but they could also be a solution to the country’s high unemployment.
Conflict resolution mechanisms: The EU has a long history in diplomacy and conflict resolution. It can offer mediation, dialogue, and negotiation platforms for resolving internal and external disputes in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Civil society: The EU can strengthen civil society, thereby enhancing political participation and policy renewal.
Strong neighbourhood ties: As an EU member, Bosnia and Herzegovina could benefit from the freedoms and cross-border cooperation that come with membership. Joint regional projects and dialogues can strengthen relations with neighbouring countries.
