Dayton's Legacy and the American Compass: What is the US Policy Towards Bosnia and Herzegovina Today and Where is it Heading?

For NAP writes: Prof. Dr. Hazim Bašić, member of the Presidency of Krug 99

Thirty years after the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina ended with the Dayton Peace Agreement, the recently adopted bipartisan Resolution in the US Senate and Congress reaffirms what was laid as a foundation in 1995. The United States sees stability, European integration, and a counterweight to malign foreign influences as priorities for BiH. The Resolution also recalls the weight of the past, the genocide in Srebrenica, and systematic ethnic cleansing, which remain central facts defining the West's moral obligation to Bosnia and Herzegovina.

What does this practically mean for political life and democracy in BiH? First, Washington clearly emphasizes reforms that are a prerequisite for Euro-Atlantic integration: resolving constitutional issues, strengthening institutions, and reforming the judiciary and economy. This is not just rhetoric; the Resolution explicitly notes the opening of EU accession negotiations with BiH in March 2024 and NATO's initiative through the Individually Tailored Partnership Programme in October 2025, which bring Bosnia and Herzegovina closer to membership. These events serve as leverage (rewards) for progress, but also as reference points, i.e., benchmarks for what is expected of us.

Second, the role of the Office of the High Representative (OHR) remains unquestionable. The Resolution calls on the US to maintain support for the OHR until the Peace Implementation Council (PIC) reaches a consensus on its closure. It should be noted that the term 'consensus' of PIC member states was used. Thus, the senators are sending a message about the necessity of international oversight until domestic institutions demonstrate a lasting capacity to govern the country. The OHR, therefore, is seen in American plans as a safeguard, as long as it is needed.

Third, the focus on countering the influences of Russia and China indicates the geopolitical framework within which the US shapes its policy towards the Western Balkans. The Resolution encourages regional cooperation against the 'malign influence' of these actors, signaling that support for reforms and security partnerships will come through the prism of broader confrontation with strategic rivals.

What specifically must Bosnia and Herzegovina do to capitalize on this pro-Western course?

‣ Constitutional and electoral reforms. Resolve the issue of political inclusion so that citizens, not ethnic structures, become the key bearers of sovereignty, rights, and political will. Without a clear and just institutional architecture, Euro-Atlantic integration remains a theory, as the Resolution explicitly emphasizes.

‣ Rule of law and judicial reforms. Real depoliticization of the judiciary and the fight against corruption are necessary. Foreign support and assistance for further progress will likely be conditioned on evidence of the functionality of the judicial system. This is one of the key demands of the EU as well.

‣ Economic reforms and the market. Transparency, investor protection, and the reduction of state monopolies will be the basis for attracting capital and raising the economic standard.

‣ Regional cooperation. Resolving bilateral issues and implementing agreements with EU and NATO partners accelerates integration processes.

How will the US support these goals in practice? The main directions of US policy towards Bosnia and Herzegovina in the coming years will likely be as follows:

‣ Maintaining the international framework (OHR and PIC). Until domestic institutions take responsibility, the US will support mechanisms that prevent regression and ensure respect for the Dayton Agreement in terms of the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the state.

‣ Strengthening security partnership. NATO partnership, including individual programs, will serve as a bridge to membership for BiH, while strengthening military interoperability and security capacities.

‣ Support for EU integration. The US will support progress through diplomatic assistance and targeted investments, but will also condition greater assistance on concrete reforms.

‣ Confrontation against malign foreign influences. Sanctions, targeted restrictions, and diplomatic pressure on actors undermining stability in the region will be part of the measures, in coordination with EU and NATO partners.

‣ Mobilizing the diaspora and public diplomacy. The American-Bosnian community (estimated at around 350,000 people) remains a bridge between the two countries and a resource for political and economic support.

In conclusion, US policy towards Bosnia and Herzegovina today balances between two imperative ideas: acknowledging the weight of the past (the obligation not to forget crimes) and the demands for a future based on civil rights, the rule of law, and European integration.

The Senate Resolution confirms this; support exists, but it is conditioned on a transformation that BiH must bring about itself, with assistance, but also with clear expectations from its Western allies. In practice, this means fewer declarative statements and more concrete, measurable reforms.