logo
China slams US tariffs: 'There are no winners in a trade war'

China slams US tariffs: 'There are no winners in a trade war'

Euronews12-03-2025
By Euronews
The Bosnian Serb leader enacted laws to ban state-level security and judicial bodies in one part of the country's territory, following his controversial sentencing last Wednesday.
ADVERTISEMENT
The president of Bosnia and Herzegovina's Serb-majority entity of the Republika Srpska (RS), Milorad Dodik, has introduced new laws meant to ban the operation of state-level security and judicial institutions in what comprises about half of the Western Balkan country's territory.
The acts, which were previously adopted by the RS' National Assembly, came in response to the first-instance verdict by the state-level Court of BiH against Dodik issued last Wednesday, causing a major political crisis in the EU membership hopeful.
The Sarajevo-based court sentenced the Bosnian Serb leader to one year in prison and barred him from politics for six years for going against the decisions of the international community's peace envoy, German diplomat Christian Schmidt, which constitutes a criminal act. The verdict is not final, and Dodik can appeal it.
In Bosnia, the High Representative acts as the chief arbiter in high-profile disputes and the key figure overseeing the implementation of the Dayton Agreement, signed in 1995 to stop the war in the country.
The agreement brought about the end of the war between the country's three main ethnic groups — Bosniaks, Serbs and Croats — that began in 1992 during the dissolution of the former Yugoslavia, deemed as the bloodiest conflict on European soil since World War II.
The peace deal, parts of which act as the country's constitution, split the country into two main administrative units, or entities: the Serb-majority RS and the Bosniak-Croat Federation of BiH (FBiH), partially overseen by an umbrella state-level government.
Meant to appease the former belligerents, it created a complicated system of checks and balances, said to be the world's most complex democracy.
On Thursday, Dodik — who has rejected the verdict as instigated by Bosniaks, as well as High Representative Schmidt's legitimacy — asked the Bosnian citizens for calm, blaming Bosniak politicians for what he said was warmongering and 'revenge against the Serbs'.
'They believe that they should eliminate in the political sense every Serb who does not correspond to their political projections,' Dodik added.
Neighbouring Serbia's President Aleksandar Vučić said he had insisted Dodik go to the capital for talks after the verdict, but there was no response 'apart from a barrage of insults'.
'I have always considered that any conversation is better, more beneficial and more important than any display of strength, power and force,' Vučić emphasised.
Meanwhile, one of the members of the three-way Bosnian Presidency, Denis Bećirović, said that he has filed a request with the country's Constitutional Court over the constitutionality of the latest set of laws.
Apart from Bećirović, the speakers of the state-level Parliamentary Assembly's two chambers, Denis Zvizdić and Kemal Ademović, stated they would do the same.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Pushing Kyiv to give up land 'will force Ukrainians to the streets'
Pushing Kyiv to give up land 'will force Ukrainians to the streets'

Euronews

time6 hours ago

  • Euronews

Pushing Kyiv to give up land 'will force Ukrainians to the streets'

A possible deal to end Russia's war against Ukraine will include 'land swapping' from both sides, US President Donald Trump said, which in reality means territorial concessions for Ukraine. Kyiv forces do not occupy any of Russia's territory, meaning there could be no deal regarding returning Moscow its land. All of the land in question is the territory Russia has occupied in Ukraine since the first invasion in 2014 followed by Moscow's all-out war in 2022. If Trump pressures Ukraine to relinquish its territory, he would not be convincing Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Instead, he will have to persuade the people of Ukraine. And unlike Trump, Zelenskyy understands who will have the last word, just as he knows that even he cannot convince the Ukrainian people of what they reject. The county's civil society demonstrated it well enough, including just weeks ago. Anton Liagusha, Dean of the Graduate Department of Social Sciences and Humanities at the Kyiv School of Economics, told Euronews that if Ukrainian authorities are pressured into territorial concessions, 'it will force the Ukrainian people to take to the streets.' 'This will not so much be a story of protest against the authorities, but a cry from the Ukrainian people to the whole world to be treated as a great country in the centre of Europe, and not just viewed by the US as a piece of land," Liagusha said. "Ukrainians are a full-fledged nation, and Ukraine is a great state with its own legislation.' Liagusha explained that ever since Ukraine became an independent county, the society has clearly established its decisive power when 'during the Revolution of Dignity (in 2014), and before that the Orange Revolution (in 2004) and before that the Revolution on Granite in 1991, we saw that people do not accept power in terms of authoritarianism and clear hierarchy.' 'The president in Ukrainian society is not a king, meaning that his will does not determine the will of the entire Ukrainian people," he pointed out. 'We all hear what society says' Since the beginning of Russia's full-scale invasion in early 2022, this balance of power has crystallised even more clearly 'when we see in Ukrainian society that almost every family has been affected by this war, directly or indirectly," according to Liagusha. 'People are fighting against the aggressor, for democracy, and for our country to become a member of the European Union and be part of Europe," he said. And so, whatever decisions are made with the participation of the president, it means that these decisions can be confirmed by Ukrainian society through direct street demonstrations.' This was proven yet again in July when thousands of Ukrainians took to the streets to protest against the bill that could have effectively eliminated the independence of the country's anti-corruption institutions. Thousands of Ukrainians demonstrated until Zelenskyy proposed a new bill only days later to restore the independence of the anti-corruption bodies. Nationwide protests forced the government to overturn the initial bill in a move widely seen as a win for democracy in Ukraine, even during Russia's all-out war. Demonstrators made it clear that their anger was directed solely at the bill, and their demands were limited to restoring the independence of anti-corruption bodies. But after three revolutions in just over 30 years, one of which resulted in ousting the pro-Russian Victor Yanukovich in 2014, Ukrainian presidents and authorities are very sensitive to the voice of the street. Having signed a new bill, Zelenskyy himself said, 'We all hear what society says. We see what people expect from state institutions to ensure justice and the efficiency of each institution.' Zelenskyy surely knows what to expect from Ukrainian civil society should there be pressure to cede territories. But Ukraine's foreign partners, specifically the US, do not seem to comprehend it. When asked why, Liagusha said the reasons can be explained by the level of comfort of life. 'Life in the United States and many European countries is more or less stable and comfortable," he explained. "These societies have long lacked experience with large-scale protests and the high level of activity seen in Ukrainian civil society.' Liagusha also points out that Western democracies primarily view Ukrainian civil society as self-organised groups of people that are created or organised to solve specific tactical problems and issues. 'There is no understanding that the volunteer movement, civil society for the protection of human rights, and activists in various fields are truly such a society and are the creators of the new Ukrainian state.'

Trump-Putin Alaska summit: High stakes at historic meeting
Trump-Putin Alaska summit: High stakes at historic meeting

Euronews

time8 hours ago

  • Euronews

Trump-Putin Alaska summit: High stakes at historic meeting

As Donald Trump is hosting Vladimir Putin for a historic summit in Alaska, Ukraine and Europe are holding their breath for what the meeting can bring. For the US president, the summit represents an unprecedented opportunity to establish himself as a peacemaker and push Russia to a ceasefire. For Putin, this is a chance to change tack despite his unwillingness to engage in direct negotiations with his Ukrainian counterpart Volodymyr Zelenskyy. Ukraine's president has not been invited to the summit at the US military Joint Base Elmendorf-Richardson in Anchorage, but Trump hopes he will be present for the second round of talks. The question remains, will there be a second meeting after the negotiations in Alaska? Follow our live updates as Euronews journalists around Europe bring you the latest developments in the blog below:

Fact check: Are most refugees in Europe of Muslim background?
Fact check: Are most refugees in Europe of Muslim background?

Euronews

time12 hours ago

  • Euronews

Fact check: Are most refugees in Europe of Muslim background?

ADVERTISEMENT A politician from the far-right Portuguese Chega party, which is known for its anti-immigration policies, alleged in a post shared on X that "85% of refugees are Muslim" on 1 August. Chega has previously faced accusations of Islamophobia, with the party's leader André Ventura having called for the "drastic reduction of the Islamic presence in the European Union.' Chega party's lawmaker Pedro Frazão also claimed that "instead of seeking asylum" in other Muslim countries, these individuals "choose to flee to the West." Both claims are difficult to back with data, as there is a lack of precise and up-to-date data cataloguing refugees' religious affiliation. However, it is evident that wars, economic crises and natural disasters impact the makeup of the global refugee population. While the United Nations produces a vast amount of data on refugees and forcibly displaced people worldwide, it is heavily reliant on government data. While some countries provide information on refugees' religious affiliations, others do not. Where did refugees come from in 2024? According to the UN refugee agency UNHCR, the global refugee population, including people in need of international protection, reached nearly 42.7 million in 2024. In addition, there were 73.5 million people displaced within the borders of their own countries (IDPs) and 8.4 million asylum-seekers. Within Europe, Germany was the European country which hosted the most refugees in 2024 — which has been the case since 2015. Research conducted by the German government published in 2021 revealed that between 2013 and 2019, 69.7% of the refugees it hosted were Muslim faithful. However, these figures predate Russia's full-scale invasion of Ukraine in early 2022, when millions of Ukrainians were forced to leave the country at war. The latest data from the UNHCR showed that in 2024, nearly seven out of 10 of all refugees and people in need of international protection originated from Syria, Afghanistan, South Sudan, Venezuela and Ukraine. The main religion in Syria, Afghanistan and South Sudan is Islam, but in Ukraine and Venezuela, different branches of Christianity are the predominant belief. Given that Ukrainians and Venezuelans made up nearly one-third of all refugees and other people in need of international protection in 2024, it is "unlikely" that 85% of refugees are Muslim, a UN spokesperson told EuroVerify. Although a country may have a Muslim-majority population, this does not mean that all refugees who originate from there are Muslim, and vice versa. In addition, those who nominally belong to an ethnic group associated with Islam might not be actual believers. Muslim-majority nations top the list of host countries Contrary to the claim that refugees of Muslim background predominantly seek refuge in the West, Germany is the only European country which features among the seven countries which have hosted the most asylum seekers since 2015. Iran and Turkey are the two top countries where the most refugees sought asylum between 2015 and 2024. Meanwhile, four out of the seven nations which hosted the most asylum seekers in this period — Iran, Turkey, Chad and Pakistan — were Muslim-majority countries, which debunks the claim that refugees who identify as Muslim only seek refuge in the West.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store