The International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies (IFIMES)[1] based in Ljubljana, Slovenia, regularly conducts analyses of events spanning the Middle East, the Balkans, and global affairs. Amid the escalating political and security crisis in Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH), and the ongoing attack on the country’s constitutional order by Milorad Dodik (SNSD), IFIMES has prepared an in-depth report of the latest developments. From the comprehensive analysis “Bosnia and Herzegovina 2025: Plenković’s Undermining of Fragile Peace in the Western Balkans?” we present the most relevant and insightful excerpts.
The statement by Croatian Prime Minister Andrej Plenković (HDZ), declaring that the Republic of Croatia would not impose sanctions on the President of the Republika Srpska entity, Milorad Dodik (SNSD), represents the most serious blow to Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) since December 1991, when a joint criminal enterprise (JCE) was launched in Zagreb with the aim of creating the “Croatian Republic of Herzeg-Bosnia (HR–HB)” as a future constituent part of the Republic of Croatia.
“We are not in the same position as other countries that are not neighbours. Banja Luka is only a 90-minute drive from Zagreb. That is why we aim to send a message of reassurance, promote dialogue, and steer political actors in BiH back into the constitutional framework,” said Croatian Prime Minister Andrej Plenković following a meeting with HDZBiH leader Dragan Čović. According to available reports, he subsequently held a secret meeting with Milorad Dodik.
The International Institute IFIMES recently published an analysis titled “Bosnia and Herzegovina 2025: Two US plans for the Balkans and BiH at odds with expansionist concepts?” (6 March 2025), available at: https://www.ifimes.org/en/researches/bosnia-and-herzegovina-2025-two-us-plans-for-the-balkans-and-bih-at-odds-with-expansionist-concepts/5464
Under the US-led trilateral initiative involving the United States, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Serbia, the plan envisions BiH and Serbia joining NATO and the EU simultaneously, pending the outcome of ongoing negotiations between Washington and the Russian Federation. The maximum concession Serbia could expect would be the option to preserve its military neutrality. However, EU membership would remain mandatory, accompanied by a requirement to grant the United States access to its rare metal deposits.
At the end of February 2025, a non-paper was delivered to the High Representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina (OHR), Christian Schmidt (CSU), containing, among other things, five key steps:
The non-paper also includes sections titled: “Who stands to lose from this?” and “How to get everyone on board?”
In this context, we noted that Turkey is asserting itself as a key partner to the EU, owing to its political, intelligence, and defence ties with Ukraine, as well as its relations with Russia, the United States, and particularly with Islamic countries — from Saudi Arabia and Iran to Iraq, Qatar, and even the UAE. According to the US plan, Turkey would assume the role of guardian of the Balkans’ external borders and guarantor of Bosnia and Herzegovina’s sovereignty.
Following the publication of our findings, the Republic of Croatia accelerated the signing of a declaration, effectively a military agreement, with Albania and Kosovo on 18 March. A swift countermeasure followed, with Serbia and Hungary signing their own military agreement on 1 April 2025. While also directed against Bosnia and Herzegovina, this agreement primarily targets Croatia, in light of Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán’s (Fidesz) expansionist ambitions, which include parts of Croatian territory. This prompted Croatian officials to reach out to several actors, including former Croatian President Kolinda Grabar-Kitarović (HDZ), in search of military equipment and hardware outside of NATO channels, in anticipation of a potential confrontation with Hungary and fearing Orbán’s close ties with both Donald Trump and Vladimir Putin. Both military agreements prompted NATO to distance itself, stating: “NATO as an organisation is not a party to these agreements and had no role in the consultation process.” By forming a military bloc with Albania and Kosovo on 18 March 2025, without the consent of the United States and NATO, Plenković directly challenged the American plan for the simultaneous accession of BiH and Serbia under NATO’s umbrella.
Regrettably, in addition to Croatia, Albania, Hungary, and Serbia, Kosovo has also joined an alliance that jeopardises regional stability and peace, while undermining the sovereignty of Bosnia and Herzegovina — although doing so strengthens Kosovo and deepens its ties with NATO member states.
In addition to Serbia, both Croatia and Hungary, as EU and NATO members, support Dodik and, by extension, the division of Bosnia and Herzegovina. Of particular concern is Slovenia’s position, led by the Social Democrats (SD), successors of the former communists, which likewise refuses to impose sanctions on Dodik. The result is a troubling paradox: the three most prominent former Yugoslav republics — Serbia, Croatia, and Slovenia — are effectively backing Dodik’s agenda to partition Bosnia and Herzegovina. Slovenia continues to reject sanctions against Dodik and his oligarchic circle, and it has also failed to investigate his suspicious assets in the country, which, according to US estimates, amount to three billion. Germany, Austria, the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, France, and other countries have clearly identified Milorad Dodik as a problem that needs to be eliminated. While the strategic motivations behind Serbian and Hungarian support for Dodik have long been apparent (assuming he indeed enjoys unequivocal backing in Serbia), few could have anticipated Plenković’s political salto mortale: that by forging a military alliance and supporting Dodik, he would attempt to fracture Bosnia and Herzegovina, derail efforts to de-escalate tensions between BiH and Serbia, and obstruct a trilateral agreement led by the United States.
On 10 March 2025, just one week before the announcement of the Croatian-Albanian military alliance, Bosnia and Herzegovina’s Minister of Defence, Zukan Helez, stated: “In my address to NATO Secretary General Mark Rutte, I proposed that Bosnia and Herzegovina be granted immediate conditional membership in the Alliance. Should that create problems in the region, I also suggested that Serbia be offered conditional membership in NATO as well. I believe this would ensure lasting peace and stability in BiH and the entire region.” Helez’s statement aligned with the trilateral plan and US strategic interests. Minister Helez’s recent successful visit to the Pentagon and the United States also offered a chance to advance dialogue on the trilateral initiative. Helez was the first national-level minister from the region, and among the first in the world, to visit the US following the inauguration of the new American administration. The visit provided an opportunity to further strengthen the partnership and ensure continued support from the United States for Bosnia and Herzegovina. “The United States is our friend and key foreign policy partner,” Minister Zukan Helez emphasised.
Talks in the United States focused on the details and prospects of jointly advancing Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia toward NATO and EU integration. Milorad Dodik was instructed to initiate talks with the “Bosniak side,” in line with the US strategy of parallel accession tracks for BiH and Serbia — a policy that runs counter to the interests of the Republic of Croatia. Slovenia has veered off course by refusing to impose sanctions on Dodik and is eroding its own position. It is politically untenable for Slovenia to align and equate its foreign policy with that of Croatia and Prime Minister Andrej Plenković. Milorad Dodik and his circle of oligarchs pose a threat to Slovenia’s national security, having infiltrated the country with opaque capital. Owing to his political ties with both the government and the opposition, as well as Slovenian business tycoons, Dodik has become a domestic political actor with potential influence over Slovenia’s upcoming parliamentary and local elections in 2026. His eventual downfall could send shockwaves through Slovenia’s political landscape, while the response of Slovenian investigative bodies remains pending.
Plenković’s disruptive move aimed at delivering two blows at once — through the formation of a military alliance and support for Dodik — thereby undermining three states (Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia and Hungary) has met with resistance and condemnation not only from NATO but also from the European Union and the US administration, which has identified Plenković as an ally of Donald Trump’s opponents in Washington.
Plenković seems to forget that, beyond maintaining a trade surplus, Bosnia and Herzegovina is the single most important country for Croatia’s economy, with which it shares a 1,011-kilometre border. Any instability in Bosnia and Herzegovina — let alone an armed conflict — would have catastrophic consequences for the Croatian economy, starting with tourism and extending to other key sectors. The largest Croatian urban centres are geographically closer to Bosnia and Herzegovina than to Zagreb.
The degree of influence that Milorad Dodik (SNSD) and Dragan Čović (HDZBiH) have over the so-called Troika (SDP, People and Justice, Our Party) is unmatched in the region. It may sound unbelievable, but Dodik and Čović wield more influence and authority over the Troika than over the opposition within their own ethnic constituencies. We once again propose that the Troika offer Plenković the option of accepting electoral law reform in exchange for Bosnia and Herzegovina’s accession to NATO. They should also propose to Vučić a joint path for BiH and Serbia toward NATO and EU membership, with the option that BiH and the international community recognise Serbia’s military neutrality as part of Serbia’s accession to the EU, provided that Serbia supports BiH’s NATO membership. Serbia needs to find a way out of the current situation as soon as possible.
The so-called Troika remains completely detached from all geopolitical strategies and plans — incompetent and underqualified. Notably, they disregarded Turkey’s diplomatic protest note, and it is equally striking that neither the Party of Democratic Action (SDA) nor the Islamic Community in BiH responded to Turkey’s request to halt a theatre production deemed offensive to Turkey and the Turkish people. Amid the general confusion within the BiH leadership, even the so-called opposition appears politically tone-deaf when it comes to defending the interests of Turkey, a country that strongly supports BiH. With the exception of representatives of veterans and war victims, all other actors remained silent, once again confirming the fragmented state of Bosniak/Bosnian politics — a warning first voiced as early as 2009 by President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan of the Republic of Turkey.
Bosnia and Herzegovina’s future lies in NATO membership, as the most effective response to all expansionist agendas in the region, whether Greater Serbian, Croatian, Albanian, Hungarian, or Bulgarian. Each of these projects has been directed against BiH. The two US-sponsored agreements safeguard the integrity of the country, a status that is not expected to change. Any state contemplating territorial expansion should reflect on the fate of Slobodan Milošević and Franjo Tuđman, and the failure of their policies in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Russia’s policy in Ukraine — where it believed it could seize control of the country within 48 hours — and similar designs in the Middle East have likewise proven unachievable.
In today’s global context, redrawing borders or instigating armed conflict carries immense risk — even for major powers such as the United States and China, let alone for regional actors like Dodik, Čović, and their mentors. All pro-Bosnian stakeholders should focus their efforts on securing Bosnia and Herzegovina’s accession to NATO, which is also in line with the interests of the global powers. Bosnia and Herzegovina cannot be divided, and any outbreak of conflict within its borders would not only spell the end of the political agendas of Dodik and Čović, but also pose a serious security threat to neighbouring Serbia and Croatia. The war in Ukraine has shown that, in modern conflict, anyone can end up fighting anyone — and that political alignments can change by the day, driven by immediate interests.
Bosnia and Herzegovina is a matter of global interest, as a European and internationally recognised state backed by the United States as a guarantor of its stability — a status that is expected to remain unchanged. With US support, Turkey’s role could prove pivotal in the Balkans, given that the crisis in Bosnia and Herzegovina is both political and security-related, as evidenced by the increased deployment of international military personnel and equipment (EUFOR BiH – Althea).
Ljubljana/Brussels/Washington/Ankara, 2 May 2025
[1] IFIMES - International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies, based in Ljubljana, Slovenia, has a special consultative status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council ECOSOC/UN in New York since 2018, and it is the publisher of the international scientific journal “European Perspectives”, link: https://www.europeanperspectives.org/en
