The judiciary of Bosnia and Hercegovina issued arrest warrants for the President of the Republika Srpska (RS), Milorad Dodik and two other RS officials, due to violation of the constitutional order. The current political crisis is a big test for the state institutions and the rule of law in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) is facing its most severe crisis since the signing of the Dayton Peace Agreement in 1995. In 2024, the European Council decided to open accession negotiations with BiH, a historic breakthrough after years of stagnation in the country's European integration process. However, the current crisis highlights that the decision was driven more by shifting geopolitical realities than by concrete reforms or achievements of the now-collapsed state-level governing coalition.
Since March 2025, the leadership of the Republika Srpska (RS) entity has taken a series of decisions that undermine BiH’s sovereignty and constitutional order. RS authorities have passed laws prohibiting the work of state-level judicial and law enforcement institutions (the Court of BiH, the Prosecutor’s Office, and the State Investigation and Protection Agency — SIPA) on the entity territory, while establishing entity-level judicial and prosecutorial councils, effectively usurping state competencies. The RS Criminal Code was amended to allow for the prosecution of civil servants from RS who continue working in BiH-level institutions, and a "Foreign Agents" law was introduced to target media and NGOs funded from abroad — the same foreign sources that have supported the development of RS institutions for decades.
These decisions were a response to the first-instance verdict against RS President Milorad Dodik, who was sentenced to one year in prison and banned from holding public office for six years for failing to comply with decisions of the High Representative — the international authority overseeing the implementation of the Dayton Peace Agreement. However, this was not a spontaneous reaction to the ruling, but rather the execution of a long-standing separatist agenda. For years, these ambitions remained largely rhetorical, but the swift and coordinated adoption of new laws suggests they were carefully prepared in advance, with the verdict serving as a trigger rather than a cause. Instead of using his right to appeal, Dodik chose to escalate the political conflict, with RS authorities initiating constitutional changes and adopting a law on the "protection of RS constitutional order," further eroding state-level competencies and dismantling decades of reform aimed at state-building and Euro-Atlantic integration.
The crisis deepened further when Dodik, the President of RS, along with the Prime Minister of RS, the Speaker of the RS National Assembly, and other RS officials, ignored summonses and refused to comply with legal proceedings. In response to the judiciary's decision to issue arrest warrants, RS authorities escalated tensions by announcing the creation of an RS border police force, directly encroaching on state competencies and further undermining BiH’s constitutional order.
The Impact of RS Decisions on the State and Regional Stability
BiH is a complex state with a constitutional framework that ensures the supremacy of state law over entity laws. Republika Srpska’s recent legislative actions represent an attack on the constitutional and legal order, as they unilaterally claim jurisdiction over state-level matters. This threatens the functionality and legitimacy of state institutions, raising concerns about a gradual institutional split or even de facto secession.
Two primary mechanisms exist to counter these threats: the Criminal Code of Bosnia and Herzegovina, which defines offenses related to violations of constitutional order and territorial integrity, and the Constitutional Court, which has temporarily suspended the contested RS laws. In addition, state judicial institutions have promptly launched an investigation into the violations, with the highest RS officials refusing to cooperate. Their detention, as ordered by the BiH Court, is widely perceived as a significant security challenge. The response of state institutions will be a critical test of their capacity to uphold the rule of law. Clear and timely communication from judicial institutions will be crucial to counter misinformation and prevent inflammatory rhetoric from domestic and regional political actors, particularly from Serbia, whose officials have previously criticized BiH judiciary decisions.
Institutional Resilience and the Role of International Actors
Given BiH’s aspirations for EU membership, it is essential that the EU and its member states closely monitor the security situation and provide unequivocal support to state institutions in upholding the rule of law. The recent deployment of additional EUFOR forces demonstrates the EU’s commitment to maintaining stability. However, the future of the EUFOR Althea mission remains uncertain, as its mandate is subject to annual renewal at the UN Security Council, where Russia’s stance is unpredictable. While RS authorities have openly called for the mission’s termination, the focus should be on closely monitoring EUFOR’s activities in BiH and the ongoing diplomatic efforts to ensure its continued presence.
As 2025 marks the 30th anniversary of the Dayton Agreement, the ongoing crisis presents an opportunity to reassess the role of international actors in BiH. The expectation that domestic institutions should take greater responsibility for enforcing the Dayton framework is a positive response to the country’s long-standing challenges—one that should have been implemented in practice long ago. However, this process must be gradual and accompanied by international support to strengthen institutions, rather than a sudden withdrawal of international engagement, which could further destabilize the country.
External Influences and Geopolitical Dimension
Aleksandar Vučić, the President of Serbia, continues to provide political support to Milorad Dodik, reinforcing his secessionist rhetoric and undermining Bosnia and Herzegovina’s sovereignty. While Vučić recently canceled Dodik’s planned address to the National Assembly of Serbia due to domestic political tensions, this does not signal a retreat from his broader strategy. On the contrary, Serbian authorities increasingly use the situation in BiH to divert attention from internal crises. All key Serbian officials have condemned the actions of BiH’s judiciary in the Dodik case, making unsubstantiated claims that institutions based in Sarajevo, along with Bosniak political representatives, pose a security threat. Simultaneously, state-controlled and tabloid media outlets have intensified their efforts to build a narrative of Serb victimhood in BiH, echoing propaganda tactics from the 1990s with potentially dangerous consequences. The lack of a decisive EU response to such behavior by an EU candidate country raises serious questions about the Union’s credibility in promoting stability and the rule of law in the region.
Hungary continues to act outside the framework of EU institutions in BiH, openly supporting Dodik and challenging the legitimacy of BiH’s judiciary. In addition to political backing, Budapest is increasingly mentioned as a potential destination for Dodik should he seek to evade legal consequences, following the precedent set by former Macedonian Prime Minister Nikola Gruevski. This approach further undermines the EU’s credibility, as the Union shows no willingness to sanction a member state for actions that contradict the rule of law and European values in BiH.
Russia has once again openly backed Dodik, directly undermining BiH’s institutions and further destabilizing the situation. Pro-Russian Telegram channels are systematically spreading panic and predicting conflict in BiH, employing well-rehearsed disinformation tactics seen in other crisis areas. Given the ties between RS authorities and radical pro-Russian paramilitary groups, this development poses not only a security threat to BiH but also to the EU. A prolonged crisis in BiH serves Russia’s strategic interests by diverting the EU’s attention away from Ukraine and other security challenges. This weakens the EU’s influence in the Balkans and undermines Western unity. However, key actors—Dodik, Vučić, and Russian authorities—may have miscalculated the firm stance of the United States, which remains steadfast in its support for BiH’s sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Crisis as a Turning Point?
The current crisis in Bosnia and Herzegovina represents both a significant threat and a potential turning point for the country’s future. It exposes the urgent need for a comprehensive reassessment of BiH’s constitutional structure and the international community’s role in overseeing its implementation. The escalating tensions, particularly the undermining of state institutions by the Republika Srpska leadership, challenge the very foundations of BiH’s sovereignty and constitutional order, threatening a breakdown in its state-building and reform efforts.
Simultaneously, this crisis serves as a critical test for the European Union’s capacity to act decisively within its own neighborhood. BiH’s stability has become a litmus test for the credibility of the EU’s enlargement policy, especially given the influence of external actors such as Serbia, Russia, and Hungary in fueling separatist agendas. The EU’s response to these developments will play a pivotal role in determining whether BiH can remain on a path toward Euro-Atlantic integration or if the country risks further fragmentation. Such fragmentation could destabilize the region and have far-reaching consequences for peace and security in the Balkans. The outcome of this crisis will ultimately shape BiH's future trajectory, either reinforcing its European aspirations or leading to deeper division and prolonged instability.
