NO STRATEGY The money from the BiH Budget is not an entity matter: Why are we paying court rulings instead of planes and our country's defense capabilities

By: Amina Čorbo-Zećo

While Bosnia and Herzegovina is going through one of the most complex and expensive international arbitrations in its recent history, a serious dilemma arises - how do we understand state institutions, the budget, and most importantly - sovereignty over our own finances?

After the International Centre for Settlement of Investment Disputes (ICSID) issued a final ruling ordering Bosnia and Herzegovina to pay more than 110 million KM to the Slovenian company Viadukt, institutional confusion followed - from attempts to postpone payment to insisting on convening the Fiscal Council, despite clear procedures.

The profit of the Central Bank of BiH, which has already been paid into the Budget of BiH Institutions, has been at the center of the discussion since yesterday. At that moment, those funds are no longer the money of the Central Bank, nor do they belong to the entities. The Central Bank of BiH keeps a portion of its profit for itself, around 40 percent, while 60 percent is paid into the BiH Budget. As in previous years, this profit becomes state revenue, managed by the institutions of Bosnia and Herzegovina - the Parliament, the Council of Ministers, the Ministry of Finance, and the Presidency of BiH.

Therefore, it is completely unfounded to claim that this redistribution changes the fiscal framework and that convening the Fiscal Council is necessary. This is a technical correction within the existing budget, not new borrowing or an increase in expenditures above the planned fiscal limit.

But what is most concerning is the complete absence of a strategic approach.

Because, this money was allegedly supposed to be used to purchase a building for the Indirect Taxation Authority from Milorad Dodik's godfather.

If we already have a surplus of revenue, the logical question arises: why wasn't there any thought given to investing in the security and defense capabilities of the country? While countries in the region are investing in the modernization of their armies, civil protection, helicopters, planes, and other crucial equipment, BiH is using funds from its own budget to mitigate the consequences of bad decisions by entity authorities - in this case, the unilateral termination of a concession agreement by the Republika Srpska entity.

To make matters worse, that entity is now refusing to pay the debt, placing the burden of compensation on state institutions - while the entities simultaneously question their jurisdiction and legitimacy.

This situation is more than a dispute over budget lines. It reveals a deeper problem: the lack of awareness of statehood and shared responsibility. Instead of institutional solidarity, we are witnessing attempts to shift responsibility and politicize purely technical issues.

Therefore, it is time for a key discussion about what the state is spending its money on, who decides on strategic priorities, and whether that decision will ever include the security and sovereignty of the state.

Because, since we are paying for past mistakes - the least we can do is not repeat them in the future.