logo
The battle to control assets behind Bosnia crisis

The battle to control assets behind Bosnia crisis

Yahoo01-04-2025

At the heart of the deepening crisis in Bosnia -- where Serb leader Milorad Dodik has been pushing the weak central government to the brink with threats of secession -- is a battle over who owns what.
The 1995 Dayton peace deal that put an end to years of bloody war, forced ethnic Serbs -- who make up about 31 percent of the population -- to accept Bosnia's independence.
In exchange they got their own statelet of Republika Srpska (RS) with 49 percent of the Balkan nation's territory.
The Muslim majority and Catholic Croats live together in the country's other semi-autonomous half.
But the thorny issue of who owned state property -- everything from rivers and forests to military installations -- was never resolved, putting a break on Bosnia's already ailing economy.
Bosnian Muslims see the central state as the owner, a view shared by Christian Schmidt, the international envoy tasked with overseeing the Dayton accords and the country's governance.
But Dodik insists each entity owns the property under its control, saying the issue is a "red line".
He has accused Schmidt and Western powers of trying to deprive RS of "its assets" in order to weaken it and leave it as an "empty shell".
- Legal brinkmanship -
The game of legal brinkmanship began in 2022 when the RS parliament passed a law claiming all state property on its territory, but Schmidt annulled it the following year, as did Bosnia's constitutional court.
Bosnian Serb lawmakers hit back passing laws saying rulings by the high representative and the constitutional court no longer apply in RS.
Schmidt again suspended the laws and amended Bosnia's penal code to allow the courts to prosecute politicians who rejected decisions of the high representative and the constitutional court.
Dodik ignored the threat and signed the suspended laws.
As a result, he was charged with defying the decision of the high representative in August 2023.
The 66-year-old Serb leader has repeatedly attacked Schmidt's actions as "illegal", arguing that his appointment was not approved by the UN Security Council.
But in February Dodik was found guilty by the Sarajevo-based state court and sentenced to a year in prison and banned from office for six years.
Dodik rejected the verdict, saying he would no longer attend the court, with the RS parliament upping the stakes further by banning Bosnia's judiciary and police from the statelet.
- Cat and mouse game -
In a further "provocation", he floated a new constitution for the statelet, as well as a breakaway army, border police, and possible confederation with neighbouring Serbia.
That prompted Bosnia's state prosecutors to investigate Dodik, RS Prime Minister Radovan Viskovic and parliamentary speaker Nenad Stevandic for flouting the constitution.
All three have refused to be questioned and last month Bosnia issued warrants for them.
But their arrest was deemed too risky by the authorities, and Dodik travelled to Serbia on March 24 and then to Israel.
Three days later Bosnia's state court issued an international arrest warrant for him.
Despite being a wanted man, Dodik travelled to Moscow, from where he sent a video message late Monday praising Vladimir Putin. The Russian president said he was "very happy" to receive the Bosnian Serb leader when the two met in the Kremlin Tuesday.
As of Tuesday evening, Interpol had yet to issue a "red notice" for Dodik's arrest on its website.
While Bosnia has gone from one crisis to another, many analysts see this one -- with Dodik making open secessionist threats -- as the most serious since the end of the 1992-1995 war.
Dodik's aim has been to slowly chip away at Bosnia's central institutions, said Veldin Kadic, a professor at the Sarajevo University Faculty of Political Science.
He said he wanted to create a "state of legal anarchy... that could politically make Bosnia senseless as a state".
"It's either Dodik or Bosnia and Herzegovina," he told AFP.
rus/cbo/ljv/fg

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

What to know about inspections of Iran's nuclear program by the IAEA ahead of a key board vote
What to know about inspections of Iran's nuclear program by the IAEA ahead of a key board vote

Washington Post

time4 hours ago

  • Washington Post

What to know about inspections of Iran's nuclear program by the IAEA ahead of a key board vote

VIENNA — Iran's nuclear program remains a top focus for inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency, particularly as any possible deal between Tehran and the United States over the program would likely rely on the agency long known as the United Nations' nuclear watchdog. This week, Western nations will push for a measure at the IAEA's Board of Governors censuring Iran over its noncompliance with inspectors, pushing the matter before the U.N. Security Council. Barring any deal with Washington, Iran then could face what's known as 'snapback' — the reimposition of all U.N. sanctions on it originally lifted by Tehran's 2015 nuclear deal with world powers, if one of its Western parties declares the Islamic Republic is out of compliance with it.

Gavin Newsom locks horns with Trump in a politically defining moment
Gavin Newsom locks horns with Trump in a politically defining moment

CNBC

time4 hours ago

  • CNBC

Gavin Newsom locks horns with Trump in a politically defining moment

Amid immigration raids, peaceful protests, attacks on law enforcement officers and the threat of his own arrest by federal agents, California Gov. Gavin Newsomis immersed in what could be the most consequential political fight of his career. The battle between the president and the governor of the country's largest state instantly turned Newsom into the face of resistance to President Donald Trump's expansive interpretation of the authorities of his office and mass-deportation campaign. Newsom, who is a potential 2028 Democratic presidential candidate, has been taking heavy criticism from within his own party over his efforts — in part through his new podcast — to cast himself in the role of conciliator. Newsom delivered an address Tuesday night that aimed squarely at Trump and was clearly intended for a national audience. "This isn't just about protests here in Los Angeles," he said. "When Donald Trump sought blanket authority to commander the National Guard, he made that order apply to every state in this nation. This is about all of us. This is about you. California may be first, but it clearly will not end here. Other states are next. Democracy is next. Democracy is under assault before our eyes. This moment we have feared has arrived." "For someone like Newsom, the balance is: Is he able to be tough enough? Will he stand up to Trump? How does he lead at this moment?" said Democratic strategist Karen Finney. "This is unprecedented. There's not a right answer. So far, he's doing the right things, being clear, consistent, clear communication." Newsom could try to turn the situation on Trump by pointing to government overreach, but at the same time, there is real risk of an eruption violence from rogue actors, said Matt Bennett, co-founder of Third Way, a center-left think tank. "The images of the militarization of this for no reason should be enough for Newsom to win this debate as long as they can keep control of the worst of the violence," he said. "Trump always goes too far," Bennett added. "Last time, he went too far with the Muslim ban. Then he really went too far with child separation — those images really hurt Trump. Here, it's a real question. It's a much closer call this time. We just don't know yet." As it is, Newsom must balance forces that are both inside and outside of his control. That includes competing with messaging from Trump (who frequently refers to the governor as "Newscum") and the president's top lieutenants, who are ever-present on cable news, social media and political podcasts. And it involves attempting to quell violent actors while pointing to Trump's actions — which have included deploying the U.S. Marines — as an overreach. The White House maintains it is winning the public relations battle, with officials tapping a refrain this week that it was the fight they wanted replete with made-for-TV images. They included images of billowing black smoke and Waymo vehicles that protesters had set on fire. On Monday, California sued Trump for using emergency powers to deploy National Guard troops to the Los Angeles area over the weekend. Trump, citing a statute that allows the president to activate the guard to repel a foreign invasion or quell a rebellion, accused Newsom and Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass of failing to protect federal agents and property from demonstrators. Newsom has slammed the step as escalatory and said existing law enforcement could have handled any violence or destruction. He argued that the move was "purposefully inflammatory and will only escalate tensions" and that there was "currently no unmet need." Newsom has also been mounting his own messaging offensive, including on X, where he posted what appeared to be photos of troops crowded on a floor, apparently attempting to rest. "You sent your troops here without fuel, food, water or a place to sleep. Here they are — being forced to sleep on the floor, piled on top of one another. If anyone is treating our troops disrespectfully, it is you @realDonaldTrump," Newsom said on X. On Sunday, Newsom chided Trump "border czar" Tom Homan, saying in an MSNBC interview: "Tom, arrest me. Let's go." Late Monday, Newsom sat for a "Pod Save America" podcast recording in which he cast Trump's actions as unconstitutional and said some of those assigned to Los Angeles — in his view, unnecessarily — were pried away from fentanyl investigations, and potentially from border operations, for "this theatrical display of toughness by a president of the United States who is unhinged." By Tuesday morning, Newsom accused Trump and his top White House deportation architect Stephen Miller of sheltering insurrectionists. "The only people defending insurrectionists are you and @realDonaldTrump. Or, are we pretending like you didn't pardon 1500 of them?" On Tuesday afternoon, the two were locked in another public squabble after Trump told reporters he delivered some tough words to Newsom in a phone call Monday. Newsom said the two hadn't spoken since Friday, then posted an interview with NBC News from over the weekend in which Newsom contended he and Trump had a pleasant conversation and that the president barely talked about the issue at hand. The White House had a different take. "The President called Gavin Newsom to tell him to get his ass in gear," White House spokesman Steven Cheung said in a statement. "The only liar here is Newsom who continues to fail his state as he prioritizes doing interviews with leftist media to gaslight the public instead of helping his state." At that, Newsom responded on X: "Donald Trump is a stone cold liar."

Huckabee suggests Muslim countries should give up land for Palestinian state
Huckabee suggests Muslim countries should give up land for Palestinian state

Yahoo

time7 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Huckabee suggests Muslim countries should give up land for Palestinian state

The US Ambassador to Israel Mike Huckabee has suggested "Muslim countries" should give up some of their land to create a future Palestinian state. In an interview with the BBC, Huckabee said "Muslim countries have 644 times the amount of land that are controlled by Israel". "So maybe, if there is such a desire for the Palestinian state, there would be someone who would say, we'd like to host it," he said. The ambassador also called a two-state solution - a proposed formula for peace between Israel and the Palestinians that has generally received international backing, including from multiple US administrations - "an aspirational goal". The two-state solution envisages an independent Palestinian state in the occupied West Bank and in Gaza, with East Jerusalem as its capital. It would exist alongside Israel. In a separate interview with Bloomberg, Huckabee said the US was no longer pursuing the goal of an independent Palestinian state. State Department spokeswoman Tammy Bruce later said the ambassador "speaks for himself", and it is the president who is responsible for US policy in the Middle East. Later this month at the United Nations in New York, French and Saudi diplomats will host a conference aimed at laying out a roadmap for an eventual Palestinian state. Although Huckabee did not say where any future Palestinian state could be located specifically or whether the US would support such an effort, he called the conference "ill-timed and inappropriate". "It's also something that is completely wrongheaded for European states to try to impose in the middle of a war," he said, arguing that it would result in Israel being "less secure". "At what point does it have to be in the same piece of real estate that Israel occupies?" he said on the BBC's Newshour programme. "I think that's a question that ought to be posed to everybody who's pushing for a two-state solution." Asked if the US position was that there could not be a Palestinian state in the West Bank, Huckabee said: "I wouldn't say there can never be, what I would say is that a culture would have to change. "Right now the culture is that it's OK to target Jews and kill them and you're rewarded for it. That has to change." Israel rejects a two-state solution. It says any final settlement must be the result of negotiations with the Palestinians, and statehood should not be a precondition. Huckabee has previously been a strong supporter of the idea of a "greater Israel", seeking permanent Israeli control of the Occupied Palestinian Territories, and using the biblical term "Judea and Samaria" for the West Bank. Some of his language echoes positions frequently taken by ultranationalist groups in Israel. Some in this movement, including far-right ministers in the Israeli governing coalition, have argued for the expulsion of Palestinians from the occupied West Bank and Gaza, saying any future Palestinian state could exist in Arab or Muslim countries. If such a policy was enacted, rights groups and European governments say it would be a clear violation of international law. The ambassador also strongly criticised US allies for sanctioning two far-right Israeli ministers over "repeated incitements of violence against Palestinian communities" in the occupied West Bank. The sanctioning of National Security Minister Itamar Ben-Gvir and Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich was part of a joint move announced by the UK, Norway, Australia, Canada and New Zealand on Tuesday. British Foreign Secretary David Lammy said the Israeli officials had "incited extremist violence and serious abuses of Palestinian human rights". The men were banned from entering the UK and will have any assets in the UK frozen. Israel registered strong objections to the move, and Huckabee called it a "shocking decision". "I have not yet heard a good reason for why these two elected ministers have been sanctioned by countries that ought to respect the country's sovereignty and recognise that they have not conducted any criminal activity," he said. The war in Gaza began after Hamas attacked Israel in October 2023, killing some 1,200 people and taking around 251 others hostage. There are 56 hostages still being held by Hamas in Gaza, at least 20 of whom are believed to be alive. Since October 2023, at least 54,927 Palestinians have been killed, according to the territory's Hamas-run ministry of health. The UN estimates that more than a quarter of them are children. UK sanctions far-right Israeli ministers for 'inciting violence' against Palestinians Gaza health workers say four killed by Israeli gunfire near aid centre The unseen map that promised to bring peace to the Middle East

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store