As the country is in chaos and blockades, new chapters of BiH's destiny are opening

By: Fuad Đidić

Bosnia is not invited to the "Peace Committee". Of the countries in the region, Trump has not included only Serbia. All others are invited or included. I believe we should not be overly concerned about the lack of an invitation.

However, what should be a cause for our concern? There are several aspects.

First - if this Trump project materializes, it will become the gravedigger of several important elements of the UN's work. In such a case, the UN as we know it today would be left with humanitarian issues and post-war societal reconstruction. All other key conflict resolution tasks would be taken over by Trump's "Peace Committee".

Second - in that context, we should consider what the fate of the OHR would be. What would happen to the mandate authorization, headquarters, and its funding?

Furthermore, there is increasing talk on East River about changing the UN's main headquarters. A recent news item from the New York Times states that the UN has funds until June 2026. America has not paid its dues. Spain and Belgium have offered to relocate the UNDP headquarters to their countries.

Much has already been said about Trump's "Peace Committee" as a parallel UN institution. However, there is one important point here that we have missed.

Should we be concerned that America, as the main architect of the UN in 1948, is today - for the first time openly experimenting with a rival body that is, at least nominally, aimed at establishing peace?

This opens a new chapter for us in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

The history of American alienation from its own creation, from what it itself created, is long and well-known. This is a phenomenon of American "forgetfulness" that is often intentional and conscious, familiar to us from the time when they provided support in building the state structure. This American amnesia narrows our horizons in shaping foreign policy. If America continues to allow itself this "forgetfulness," it will certainly not be able to envision cooperation and negotiation diplomacy that would prevent potential future conflicts in Bosnia and Herzegovina.

As for NATO, I believe our policy should be built on the conviction that NATO is not disappearing, as is being said around. We see NATO's main problem in the change of America's role within it. Therefore, we do not believe that America will withdraw from NATO.

I want to remind you that at the end of 2023, both houses of the US Congress adopted a decision prohibiting the President from announcing the withdrawal of the US from the Alliance without the consent of the legislative body. NATO is not possible without the US.

Therefore, our view is based on the conviction that NATO will survive. However, NATO will not remain untouched. NATO will change towards a much greater degree of its Europeanization. This signals the end of an era when Europe's security was considered an integral part of America's national interests.

We have correctly understood that the transatlantic alliance has crossed the Rubicon... There is no going back. This fact forces BiH to consider its own unified security approaches and to seek new models that will not depend entirely on the political mandate of the UN.

What is the fate of EUFOR units in BiH in this situation? Will Europe have the courage to transform the current composition of EUFOR into units of a Europeanized NATO on its own?

The EU military mission currently maintains around 1,600 soldiers in Bosnia, which is significantly below the brigade strength of about 4,800 soldiers recommended by military experts.

Bosnia and Herzegovina is the only place, according to Kurt Bassuener, where the EU has a decisive geopolitical influence. Will it have the courage to use it properly?

This Friday, February 6, the first NATO military exercise involving 11 countries and 10,000 soldiers, without Americans, will begin from Gibraltar and end in the Baltics. This exercise could provide a real insight into the future of a Europeanized NATO.

Why is this fact important? It is important not only for our insight into the place and role of Germany, but also Turkey, in a future Europeanized NATO, but also for insight into the capability of the European wing of NATO to independently accept the greatest challenges.

Germany is becoming the key to European defense, both due to its ambition to become the largest European conventional army and due to its strategic position in the center of the continent.

Are we even aware of the recent secret defense plan "OPLAN - DEU 2026" of 1,200 pages behind which the German Ministry of Defense stands? We should examine it with greater interest and see how Germany envisions the defense of Europe from Russia and where it sees the role and significance of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

According to this German plan, Bosnia and Herzegovina has an important role in the defense of the Balkans against Russian military penetration into European territory.

Why are we saying all this? We are saying all this because of the upcoming elections in October 2026. Key questions of our survival lie before us. Whom can we rely on in this difficult and unpredictable time? How to negotiate with unpredictable administrations?

For such times, brave people with experience and international support are needed. Our real disaster will be if voters are willing to entrust the future of our country to someone without real experience, someone who will not gather a good team of analysts, diplomats, experienced researchers, and intelligence officers around them.

(Note: This text was read at yesterday's session of Krug 99)