The European path of Bosnia and Herzegovina (BiH) is once again in focus, and the coming week is being mentioned as a new chance for the adoption of reform laws. However, in an election year, many doubt that more serious progress is possible, while at the same time, various proposals are before representatives and delegates in the state parliament. Speaking about the current situation and the messages coming from Brussels was Adi Cerimagic, an analyst with the European Stability Initiative.
Cerimagic believes that an atmosphere has been created in BiH of competition over “who will be to blame” for the lack of progress on the European Union (EU) path.
“It seems to me as if we have a certain competition over who will actually be to blame for the lack of progress on the EU path, and that in fact different actors in the country are competing in a way to show who it is that is stopping the process, and then the expectation is from the EU to identify that culprit and then either that or in some way to capitalize on it in the elections that are ahead of us,” Cerimagic said.
He added that the EU very rarely comes out with naming individual culprits, and that it views BiH in the integration process as a whole.
“BiH is most often, especially when it comes to the process of integrations, viewed as a whole country, and I fear that given the current direction in which things have gone and the experience with the EU, by spring at the latest we will actually come into a situation where there will be yet another year lost and in fact the culprits will be everyone in BiH,” he said.
What the EU is asking from BiH
Speaking about the reform laws, Cerimagic stressed that what the European Commission and the member states of the EU say about them is crucial, and that, according to his information, this time the authorities in BiH were very clearly and in great detail informed of what is expected.
“What is most important from the perspective of the EU and the EU integration process is what the European Commission says, that is, what the member states of the EU say. This time, according to the information I have, it was explicitly and very precisely conveyed to the authorities in BiH what exactly the European Commission expects, and that is what is in line above all with the recommendations of the Venice Commission, but also with the experts engaged by the European Commission,” he said.
He recalled that these are two laws that do not represent a comprehensive reform of the judiciary, but that BiH is expected to fulfill what has been set as a requirement; otherwise, he believes, there is a risk that the laws will not be accepted.
“BiH is expected to truly fulfill everything that the European Commission is asking of it; otherwise, I would say that we have risks that the European Commission will not accept those laws. Even if there were political will among part of the member states of the EU to accept partial solutions… the other part of the member states of the EU will not accept that,” he emphasized.
He added that neither the European Commission nor most member states, as he says, “need half-measures,” but rather “a clean slate,” that is, “a clean result” from BiH.
“They need a clean slate, that is, a clean result from BiH. In that sense, all these various attempts to blur what the European Commission has asked of BiH lead to a lack of results,” he said.
Are “so-so” solutions sufficient
Asked whether the EU could accept partial solutions with the promise that amendments would come later, Cerimagic stated that the demands of the European Commission are not a “one-hundred-percent fundamental reform of the judiciary,” but that what is being requested must be fulfilled in full.
“At the outset, I must say that what the European Commission is asking from BiH is not a one-hundred-percent fundamental reform of the judiciary… So in that sense, already at the very start, the EU does not have dramatically huge expectations from BiH,” he said.
He pointed out that there is a misunderstanding when it comes to talking about smaller steps that would “open processes,” and explained that the appointment of a chief negotiator can open certain technical aspects of the negotiations, the so-called screening, but that more is needed for the formal opening of negotiations.
“What the EU has clearly said is that if there were to be an appointment of a chief negotiator, certain technical aspects of the negotiations, the so-called screening, could be opened for BiH. However, for the actual opening of negotiations, it will be necessary, in addition, to adopt two laws that must be fully aligned with what the European Commission told our authorities, and the appointment of a chief negotiator,” he said.
He added that the path to the formal opening of negotiations cannot go through divisions and mutual accusations.
“In order to reach that truly formal opening of membership negotiations, the authorities in BiH will not be able to get there through divisions, through mutual accusations, but rather through truly dedicated and responsible work on what is expected from BiH,” he stated.
Who should appoint the chief negotiator
Speaking about the debates in BiH over who should appoint the chief negotiator, Cerimagic said that for the EU, the most important thing is that the negotiator has a clear mandate and can speak on behalf of the state, and that the EU, as far as he knows, does not have a clear position on which institution should carry out the appointment.
“The EU wants that chief negotiator, whoever it may be, to, of course, have access to everyone in BiH, to be able to speak on behalf of BiH, to have a mandate like negotiators have in other countries. Negotiators do not make decisions; they coordinate, harmonize, report, convey, explain,” he said.
He warned that the EU does not want a situation in which, after the appointment, the question would be opened as to whether the negotiator had the right to speak on behalf of BiH.
“The last thing the EU wants is for a chief negotiator to be appointed and then, within some process before the Constitutional Court or something similar, it turns out that in fact that negotiator did not have the right to speak,” he said.
EU enlargement: Momentum exists, but there is no clear political decision
Cerimagic also spoke about the mood within the EU regarding enlargement. He stated that there is no clear political decision for the EU to gain a larger number of new members by the end of the decade, but that since 2022, there has been a “new momentum” and that member states have been making many decisions faster than before.
“At this moment, there is no political decision that clearly identifies that as a goal of the EU… What is, however, known is that since 2022, we have had a new momentum when it comes to enlargement policy,” he said.
He also pointed out that, although the majority of citizens in the EU support enlargement, in key countries such as Germany and France, according to his words, there is no majority for such a policy, and right-wing parties that are gaining strength are not inclined toward enlargement.
“In those key countries, Germany and France, there is no majority, and the parties that are now polling very well are not inclined toward enlargement,” he said.
Judgments of the European Court of Human Rights and the “process that the EU offers”
Asked about the possibility of implementing the judgments of the European Court of Human Rights, including the group of judgments in the Sejdic-Finci case, Cerimagic said that such issues can either continue to pile up as they have over the past 15 years, or be resolved through an organized, legal political process in which everyone participates.
“All those issues can either remain unresolved, as has been the case over the past 15 years, or they can be addressed through an organized, legal, political process in which everyone participates with the intention of reaching a result for the sake of some reward in the form of, for example, closer ties with the EU,” he said.
He added that the EU, according to him, is now offering a “process” through which political problems and challenges can be addressed, and that it is up to domestic leaders to use that offer or not.
“The EU is offering a process through which various political problems or various political challenges can be addressed, and now it is up to the political leaders in BiH to either use that offer or not,” he concluded, N1 writes.
