Mahmutović's maturity of restraint hinders the 'dead Dodik' narrative of the Three: Blockade is not national interest protection!

By: Amina Čorbo-Zećo

If anyone in Bosnia and Herzegovina has spoken about compromise, agreement, and dialogue for years, it has been the Three – SDP, NiP, and Our Party. Immediately after the fastest formed Council of Ministers of BiH, they told the public that they would "teach SDA how to run a country", that they would awaken the "European Milorad Dodik", speed up the path to the European Union, and prove that agreement is the key to everything.

That "compromise", however, quickly proved to be a compromise at the expense of BiH, especially Bosniaks. Everything worked as long as the Three, like a goldfish, fulfilled the political wishes of Milorad Dodik and Dragan Čović. The moment they realized they had been tricked, the entire construction collapsed like a house of cards.

Elmedin Konaković then tried to start the infamous "bulldozers" and remove SNSD from power, but the bulldozers ran out of fuel. SNSD, as expected, activated all the mechanisms with which they have been blocking and dismantling the country for years, and the Three found themselves stuck between Čović's and Dodik's political games, without a plan B.

That is precisely why it is important to understand today's attacks on Dževad Mahmutović. Because they come from the same ones who built power on the story of compromise and agreement, and today, almost hysterically, call for blockades and accuse Mahmutović of "helping Dodik".

So where did the compromise go? Where did the policy of agreement and negotiation go? When did blockade become a patriotic act, and stability betrayal?

Therefore, it is important to recall the words of Ramiz Salkić from the National Assembly of RS, who openly said that there are people whose only goal is to destroy, and then return to Sarajevo and continue destroying. Salkić very clearly explained the essence, the mechanisms exist, but they do not have to be used exclusively to hinder processes.

In this case, it is crucial to separate the legal from the political. Yes, the Bosniak Club had the right to initiate the vital national interest protection mechanism. But the question is not whether something is possible, but whether it is useful. It should be clear that the constitutionality of the new RS Government is not a matter of vital national interest, and its constitutionality was discussed. And after all, what happened in the Council of Peoples is not the end of the process, because there is still the option of filing an appeal with the Constitutional Court of BiH for an assessment of constitutionality.

The chaos in RS does not remain confined within the entity borders. It directly reflects on the functioning of the state, the Federation of BiH, and all BiH institutions. If the RS Government is not legalized (which the BiH Constitutional Court can decide), the entire system will enter a blockade, from fiscal decisions to international obligations of BiH. In such a scenario, no one wins – not Bosniaks, not the Federation, not the state.

Therefore, Mahmutović's restraint can be interpreted as a responsible and pragmatic political move, not as betrayal. Especially if we know that the vital national interest protection mechanism in BiH has been brutally misused for years.

The paradox is obvious, we fight against blockades, and then we seek a new blockade. Mahmutović's critics consciously ignore the fact that BiH functions exclusively through a fragile balance of pragmatism. Even a legally correct move can be politically wrong if it leads to a complete standstill.

Therefore, the label "helping Dodik" is a political pamphlet, not a serious argument. A pamphlet that comes from those who handed Dodik the keys to the country. It's not all about symbolic gestures and demonstrative vetoes. Sometimes restraint is an expression of political maturity, especially when the alternative means chaos from which no one in Bosnia and Herzegovina benefits.