1. INTRODUCTION

The stability of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) and the broader Western Balkans region remains one of the key challenges of modern European security policy. Although more than two decades have passed since the end of the war in BiH, numerous factors continue to undermine the country’s institutional functionality and overall stability. At the same time, global security challenges—such as the Russian invasion of Ukraine—further complicate regional dynamics.

The issue of BiH’s stability cannot be observed in isolation. It is tightly linked to geopolitical processes, the influence of global powers, regional ambitions, and, importantly, internal weaknesses. This report analyzes those aspects, with a particular focus on comparing U.S. involvement in the peace process in BiH during the 1990s with its current engagement in the context of Ukraine.

2. KEY FACTORS OF STABILITY IN BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA

2.1. Dayton Structure and Political Gridlock

BiH is a country with a unique and highly complex political structure. Born out of the Dayton Peace Agreement, this structure was imposed to end the war, but over time has become a source of dysfunction. The two entities—the Federation of BiH and Republika Srpska—along with the Brčko District, share authority with state-level institutions, while ethnic representation dominates decision-making processes.

Despite the existence of institutions meant to guarantee balance, political gridlock is the norm. Challenges to the Constitutional Court’s authority, refusal to implement laws, and recurring secessionist threats from Republika Srpska authorities continually test the resilience of BiH’s constitutional framework.

2.2. Role of the High Representative and the International Community

The Office of the High Representative (OHR), a remnant of the 1995 peace architecture, remains a central mechanism for preserving peace. Current High Representative Christian Schmidt faces open denial of his legitimacy from Republika Srpska and threats that its institutions will no longer recognize his decisions. Nevertheless, the OHR continues to intervene in legislative and institutional processes to prevent deeper crises.

2.3. Weak Economy and Corruption

The country also struggles with chronic unemployment, population emigration, and a dysfunctional judiciary. According to Transparency International, corruption is systemic and present at all levels of government. This combination of economic hardship and legal inefficiency erodes public trust and slows progress toward EU integration.

3. IMPACT OF THE RUSSIAN INVASION OF UKRAINE ON THE REGION

3.1. Geopolitical Tensions

Russia’s 2022 full-scale invasion of Ukraine has altered the security logic of Europe. While BiH is not under direct military threat, its internal divisions and institutional fragility make it vulnerable to external influence. The Russian Federation leverages regional political actors, especially in Republika Srpska, to spread its influence, undermine Western values, and destabilize democratic institutions.

3.2. Activities of the Russian Embassy and Pro-Russian Networks in BiH

The Russian Embassy in Sarajevo is not merely a diplomatic mission—it acts as a political agent. Through public statements, participation in events within Republika Srpska, and direct meetings with local leaders, the embassy supports rhetoric that opposes BiH’s Euro-Atlantic orientation. Notable examples include attending January 9th celebrations (an unconstitutional holiday in Republika Srpska) and openly denying the genocide in Srebrenica.

Beyond the embassy, pro-Russian organizations and media outlets operate in Republika Srpska and beyond, promoting narratives that discredit Ukraine, justify Russian aggression, and portray the West as the enemy. Disinformation and propaganda aim to shift public opinion and frame Russia as the “protector of the Orthodox world.”

3.3. Participation of Citizens from Serbia and BiH in the War in Ukraine

Since 2014, dozens of volunteers from Serbia and Republika Srpska have joined pro-Russian forces in Donbas. While Serbia formally prohibits its citizens from fighting in foreign conflicts, penalties are minimal and often symbolic. Recruitment is conducted through veteran networks, online platforms, and Russian intermediaries, posing a security challenge for BiH and the wider region.

4. U.S. APPROACH: COMPARING BOSNIA AND UKRAINE

The United States played a pivotal role in ending the war in BiH during the 1990s. Through mediation in Dayton, and with the support of the EU and NATO, a peace agreement was reached that stopped the fighting and defined the country’s political structure. Although this structure later proved dysfunctional, the U.S. approach was direct, decisive, and aimed at swift stabilization.

In Ukraine’s case, the U.S. is the largest military and financial supporter of the country’s defense against Russian aggression. However, unlike BiH, there is no format for direct peace negotiations under U.S. mediation at present. Instead, U.S. involvement is expressed through arms deliveries, diplomatic support, sanctions against Russia, and support for Ukraine’s NATO and EU ambitions.

While the U.S. acted as a guarantor of peace in BiH, in Ukraine it is a wartime ally but not a broker of negotiations. This reflects a broader transformation in global power dynamics and the evolving nature of U.S. foreign policy in complex international crises.

5. FUTURE CHALLENGES AND RECOMMENDATIONS

BiH must urgently resolve its institutional deadlock, implement key reforms aligned with the EU accession process, and strengthen anti-corruption mechanisms. Simultaneously, it must develop a national strategy to counter foreign influence and disinformation.

The role of the OHR must be clearly defined and oriented toward building domestic capacity. EUFOR should maintain its presence as a stabilizing force, while NATO cooperation must be strengthened through joint exercises and intelligence sharing.

In the context of the Russian invasion, BiH must align its foreign policy with the EU and the U.S., and unequivocally condemn violations of international law. Pro-Russian activities—however symbolic—must not go unanswered. Additionally, legislation should clearly define and penalize the participation of BiH citizens in foreign wars.

6. CONCLUSION

The stability of Bosnia and Herzegovina depends on a combination of internal responsibility and external support. The Russian invasion of Ukraine serves as a stark reminder that peace is not guaranteed but must be actively defended through vigilance, institutional resilience, and international cooperation. The Western Balkans remains a sensitive geopolitical space, with BiH as its most vulnerable component. In this context, firm positioning against aggression, comprehensive reform, and resistance to authoritarian influences are essential for lasting peace.

The articles published in the “Opinions” column reflect the personal opinion of the author and may not coincide with the position of the Center