The Myth of 'Consensus of Three Peoples' and Veto Mechanisms Hold Bosnia and Herzegovina Hostage to Projects Conceived Abroad

By: Prof. Dr. Hazim Bašić, member of the Presidency of Krug 99

Bosnia and Herzegovina has not been a victim of its citizens for decades, but rather of political constructs designed to make it dysfunctional. Among these constructs, the most dangerous myth, which Russia's representatives have also regularly begun to speak about at all major international forums, is the alleged 'consensus of three peoples' as the foundation of the state. This undemocratic and unlawful category is an indispensable part of the political rhetoric of the leaders of HDZ BiH and SNSD.

Such a consensus is not a constitutional category, nor a real principle on which Bosnia and Herzegovina rests; it is invented as a political tool. In reality, any state functions on the basis of laws and institutions, not on the blackmail of ethnic elites. In the case of Bosnia and Herzegovina, this is the main strategy of ethno-nationalists.

What we have on the political scene today is not political discussions and agreements, nor is it seeking compromise, but a systematic abuse of all available veto mechanisms. These mechanisms were conceived as protection of vital interests related to the identity issues of ethnic groups, which have since been transformed into a tool for blocking and destroying the state. In this way, Bosnia and Herzegovina is held hostage by particular projects conceived outside its borders.

Distrust in institutions is systematically spread among citizens, a sense of hopelessness is produced, and a narrative is created that the state is impossible and unsustainable. This process is not spontaneous; it is a long-conceived plan developed through various documents, laws, memorandums, and resolutions written in Serbia and Croatia. Veto mechanisms are actually key levers for the realization of Greater-state projects and the potential disappearance of Bosnia and Herzegovina as a sovereign state. They are the anatomy of political sabotage of Bosnia and Herzegovina.

Political corruption is often highlighted as the main culprit for the almost permanent post-Dayton political crisis. Corruption certainly exists and it destroys the standard of living. But insisting solely on corruption as the cause of political blockade is a skillfully placed smokescreen. The real destroyers of the state are the hegemonic projects of the two neighboring countries, which have never abandoned the policies of the nineties, they have only changed their methodology and tactics.

Instead of open aggression, today in the political domain, veto is used, along with countless other strategies such as: spreading inter-ethnic fear and hatred, apartheid, the wholesale labeling of Bosniaks (Islamic radicals, links to ISIL, Hamas, anti-Semites,...), all this with a false discourse about 'people's sovereignty', with the aim of weakening the state from within.

In such a context, the role of the High Representative is also problematized. Thus, the recently concluded court case against the former president of SNSD is not just a matter of dispute between one politician and an international official, as it is trivially presented in the media of neighboring countries. This is not a conflict between Milorad Dodik and Christian Schmidt, but between corrupt and quisling politics and the constitutional-legal order of the state.

Calls for the High Representative to leave before the end of his term are not a real fight for the internal sovereignty of the state, but a political maneuver for its further destabilization. The High Representative, until the fulfillment of five conditions and two goals, is part of the constitutional-legal system of the state; he is part of the integral Dayton arrangement.

All these processes have the same goal: to convince citizens that Bosnia and Herzegovina cannot function, that its end is inevitable, and that the only 'salvation' lies in divisions. That is why it is important to expose political spins such as the so-called 'consensus of three peoples', 'BiH is a semi-protectorate', 'equality of constituent peoples', 'Schmidt is a colonial administrator', 'Croats are leaders of EU integration', 'foreigners impose laws on us', 'BiH is a complex state',...

Ultimately, Bosnia and Herzegovina should become a state of equal citizens, with functional institutions and a clear legal framework. The moment citizens stop believing in myths and start building a state based on laws, not on ethnic blackmail, space opens up for development, integration, and true stability. In this context, the departure of Milorad Dodik from the political scene is the first necessary prerequisite. Regardless of how long this departure takes, it shows that the state is still stronger than the individual.