Bigotry on RTRS: They are bothered by the fact that non‑Serb Bosnians are buying apartments in East Sarajevo, announcing plans “to take some steps.”
Bigoted reporting about non‑Serb Bosnians buying apartments in East Sarajevo was broadcast by the Radio Television Service of Republika Srpska (RTRS), a parastate legalized by the Dayton Agreement to halt the Serbo‑Croatian campaigns that attempted to partition Bosnia and Herzegovina in the 1990s.
The presenter opens by claiming that official and unofficial data show an increasing number of non‑Serb Bosnians purchasing apartments in East Sarajevo, adding the remark that “of course, this is allowed by law.” Yet the supposed “problem” is that citizens and officials — mainly Bosnian Serbs — consider this a “dangerous trend.”
She continues in a surreal, 1990s‑style propaganda tone, saying that this trend brings back memories of “the biblical exodus of Bosnian Serbs,” who she claims, “had to leave their homes in federal Sarajevo because their non‑Serb Bosnian neighbors wanted it.” This narrative has existed since the 1990s, when Dayton drew administrative lines between the ethnically cleansed “Serb Entity” and the rest of Bosnia’s defended territory. Bosnian Serb leaders then urged all Bosnian Serbs to move inside the invisible borders of Republika Srpska, hoping one day to secede — even though the Dayton Peace Agreement grants autonomy but explicitly forbids secession.
The fact that the original agreement was written in English and recognizes the entity only as Republika Srpska — not a “republic” within a federation — shows that international negotiators anticipated future attempts at misinterpretation. And the fact that Serbia and Croatia, the aggressor states, signed the agreement and recognized Bosnia and Herzegovina’s sovereignty and unchanged borders only further undermines those who still harbor territorial ambitions. They cannot achieve those ambitions peacefully through political maneuvering — only through another war, which no one in the Balkans needs.
The presenter continues pushing propaganda as if it were fact, claiming that “those same neighbors who expelled Bosnian Serbs from Sarajevo are now rushing into their arms, wanting to live with us — ‘genocidal Serbs,’ as they like to label us. Maybe it is a well‑thought‑out plan to take control of this part of Republika Srpska through the purchase of real estate.”
Her story is supported by Miroslav Vujičić, a Bosnian Serb member of the House of Representatives of the Parliamentary Assembly of Bosnia and Herzegovina, who behaves more like a real‑estate statistician than a politician. He “revealed” that non‑Serb Bosnians have purchased close to 800 newly built housing units in East Sarajevo. “The trend is not decreasing, but growing,” he said.
The mayor of East Sarajevo, Ljubiša Čosić, sounded like someone ready to start a new Balvan Revolution, calling this trend “dangerous,” followed by “we may have a problem,” and insisting that it is necessary “to take some steps to keep the city as it was at the beginning.” He may go down in history as the only mayor unhappy to receive more taxpayers’ money.
Ironically, the presenter did tell one truth — probably by accident — when she admitted that “non‑Serb Bosnians come to East Sarajevo to purchase apartments because a square meter is cheaper, the cost of living is lower, and it is close to downtown Sarajevo, the airport, and other necessary facilities.”
Bosnia’s Communications Regulatory Agency (RAK) has initiated proceedings against RTRS over these reports.
Why This Propaganda Exists: A Clearer Explanation for Outsiders
These shameful reports are not isolated incidents. They are part of a long‑term strategy to instill fear and dehumanize Bosnians who do not share the Bosnian Serb identity. The propaganda that began in the 1990s never stopped — and it thrives today in a global climate where far‑right extremism is rising and where the Bosnian war and the genocide in Srebrenica are increasingly misrepresented as “righteous.”
To understand why this rhetoric persists, outsiders need a clearer picture of Bosnia’s demographics and history — because confusion about these topics fuels dangerous myths.
The biggest misunderstanding: what the Bosnian war actually was
Foreign observers often describe the 1992–1995 war as:
- a religious conflict,
- a civil war,
- or an eruption of “ancient ethnic hatred.”
None of these explanations are accurate.
The Bosnian war was fundamentally a war for the survival of the Bosnian state — against coordinated territorial ambitions from Serbia and Croatia.
When Yugoslavia collapsed, Bosnia declared independence, just like Slovenia and Croatia. Bosnia’s independence was internationally recognized. But unlike Slovenia or Croatia, Bosnia faced a unique threat: both Serbia and Croatia wanted to carve up its territory.
This was not spontaneous. It was not religious. It was not civil.
It was geopolitical — the continuation of a century‑old project to erase Bosnia as a political entity.
Why religion confuses outsiders
Major religion groups in Bosnia are Muslims, Orthodox Christians, and Catholics. Outsiders see this and assume religion caused the war. But religion was a marker, not a cause.
- Bosnian Muslims did not fight to impose Islam.
- Bosnian Serbs did not fight to defend Orthodoxy.
- Bosnian Croats did not fight to defend Catholicism.
They fought because political elites in Belgrade and Zagreb wanted land.
The long-term context
For over a century, nationalist ideologies in both Serbia and Croatia promoted the idea that Bosnia was not a real nation, but a space to be divided between them.
- Serbian nationalist maps labeled Bosnia as “Western Serbia.”
- Croatian nationalist maps labeled Bosnia as “Historic Croatian lands.”
- Both denied the existence of a distinct Bosnian identity.
When Bosnia declared independence in 1992, these ideologies suddenly had a chance to become reality.
How the war unfolded
- Serbia armed, financed, and commanded Bosnian Serb forces to seize territory and ethnically cleanse non-Serbs.
- Croatia supported parallel structures among Bosnian Croats with the same goal: annexation of territory.
- The aim was not coexistence, but partition.
Bosnians — regardless of religion — fought to preserve the country’s territorial integrity and political independence.
Why “civil war” is the wrong label
A civil war is internal.
The Bosnian war was international:
- The Yugoslav People’s Army (controlled by Serbia) directly intervened.
- Serbia and Croatia signed the Dayton Agreement as foreign states, proving they were parties to the conflict.
- International courts confirmed Serbia’s involvement and responsibility for genocide in Srebrenica.
- Bosnians — regardless of religion — fought to preserve the country’s territorial integrity and independence.
The Demographic Confusion
Since the 1990s, Bosnian Serbs and Bosnian Croats — labels they often reject because they see themselves as part of a wider Serbian or Croatian nation — have tried to delegitimize the Bosnian nation by portraying it as artificial or “non‑organic.” They claim Bosnians are simply people who “converted under the Ottomans,” ignoring centuries of shared Bosnian identity that predates modern nationalism.
To make matters more confusing:
- Bosnian Orthodox Christians identify as Bosnian Serbs.
- Bosnian Catholics identify as Bosnian Croats.
- Bosniaks are mainly Bosnian Muslims and Bosnian Christians/Orthodox with Bosnian roots who are loyal to the Bosnian state.
- “Others” include Roma, Turks, Albanians, Jews, and anyone who does not fit into the three nationalist categories.
This demographic complexity is often weaponized to confuse outsiders and justify territorial claims.
The Core Truth
Bosnia and Herzegovina is not an artificial state.
It is not a religious invention.
It is not a temporary arrangement.
It is a historic, multi‑ethnic nation that has survived centuries of attempts to divide it.
Bosnia fought for its survival as a sovereign state.
Serbia and Croatia fought to divide it.
Everything else — religion, ethnicity, propaganda — was a tool to justify territorial conquest.
The propaganda coming from RTRS today is simply the latest chapter in a long campaign to undermine Bosnian unity and normalize the idea that Bosnians who are not Serbs do not belong in parts of their own country.
As I noted earlier, the attacks on Bosnia and Herzegovina are not spontaneous reactions but the product of a long‑standing, well‑oiled political machinery that adapts itself to shifting geopolitical realities. A recent example came during a panel marking 30 years of the Dayton Peace Agreement, where Croatian political messaging resurfaced through Max Primorac — a Heritage Foundation member and reliable amplifier of Zagreb’s narratives. Primorac blamed the agreement for allegedly undermining Bosnian Croats because they live alongside other religious groups and the Others. According to him, “the only solution for Croats to survive in Bosnia and Herzegovina is the third entity,” and they are supposedly “the only pro‑Western group of people.”
Primorac went further, claiming that “Dayton promised equality of the three constituent peoples, but it did not come true,” and criticizing the Office of the High Representative (OHR) by insisting that “local solutions are not possible if local actors do not have sovereignty.”
This is where his argument begins to rely on deliberate linguistic manipulation. The Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina recognizes three konstitutivne ethnic groups — a term that simply means equal. The English phrase “constituent peoples” has been stretched far beyond its legal meaning. In law, “constituents” are individuals who “have the right to vote and participate in the political process, ensuring their voices are heard and their rights preserved within the political system” (legalclarity.org). Ethnic groups cannot be constituent, because people who vote are the individuals, the constituents, and their rights are fully protected in Bosnia. Primorac exploits this mistranslation to imply that Bosnian Croats lack equality, when in fact the constitutional framework guarantees equal rights to all citizens.
So what is he really doing? He is attempting to convince foreign audiences that Bosnian Croats are structurally disadvantaged and that creating a Croat‑only autonomous entity — a mirror image of Republika Srpska — would somehow correct this. But the facts tell a different story. Bosnian Croats live throughout 10 highly decentralized cantons, three of which they control with an iron grip. They hold 33% of state‑level government positions and possess veto powers that allow them to block any decision they claim harms their interests. All of this despite representing only about 15% of the population. These realities completely dismantle Primorac’s narrative that Croats lack equal rights or political leverage.
His demand for “sovereignty” is equally misleading. Sovereignty and territorial integrity belong to the state of Bosnia and Herzegovina — not to ethnic groups, political parties, or foreign governments. And as I have already emphasized, this sovereignty cannot be taken away without another war, no matter how much money Serbian and Croatian politicians pour into lobbying networks in Washington, Moscow, Beijing, or Brussels.
Primorac also attempted to frame Bosnia and Herzegovina as a “failed experiment,” claiming that such conditions have opened space for “communist China, Russia, and even Iran” to destabilize the region. It is the political equivalent of asking a pyromaniac how to extinguish a fire he helped start.
None of these claims withstand scrutiny. The primary destabilizing forces in Bosnia and Herzegovina — and by extension the region — for the past 30 years have been Serbia and Croatia. Bosnia and Herzegovina has no unresolved disputes with China, Russia, or Iran. The destabilization comes from its neighbors, not from distant geopolitical actors.
Members of the three leading parties in the House of Representatives (SDP, NiP, and NS) argue that the actions of Primorac and Željana Zovko are aimed at obstructing the B&H–USA Southern Interconnection project.
“This extreme chauvinist and nationalist is trying to perfidiously package the story of the so‑called ‘third entity’ into a wafer, even though he knows this idea is impossible to realize. The real intention, according to the directives of his principals, is to stop the latest political agreements on the Southern Interconnection project. It is unclear on whose behalf and in whose interest he is acting, but the topics he raises are aimed at destabilization and increasing tensions that halt important processes.”
They further note:
“There is nothing real behind the talk of a third entity, federalization, the departure of the High Representative, or similar topics he raises. What is clear is that aggressively pushing these narratives destabilizes the political environment in B&H. Although such topics regularly appear before elections, it is very noticeable that this time they emerged earlier — right after a political agreement was reached with the United States on a joint arrangement for constructing the Southern Interconnection, a strategically important project to reduce dependence on Russian gas.”
In the end, Primorac’s rhetoric about a third entity and the “failed state experiment” fits seamlessly into the political matrix shared by Serbia, Croatia, and their satellites in Bosnia and Herzegovina — SNSD and HDZ BiH — where the very existence of Bosnia and Herzegovina is treated as the central problem.
Croatia and Serbia publicly posture as responsible regional actors while simultaneously undermining Bosnia and Herzegovina’s sovereignty, security, and territorial integrity through duplicity, geopolitical opportunism, and hybrid tactics.
Croatia and Serbia’s Duplicity on Full Display: Environmental Blackmail, Corruption, and Hybrid Warfare
If anyone still doubts the long‑term geopolitical games Croatia and Serbia are playing at Bosnia and Herzegovina’s expense, the latest developments remove all ambiguity. Their actions — whether environmental, political, or paramilitary — reveal a consistent pattern: public diplomacy for Western audiences, and destabilization for Bosnian ones.
Croatia’s Radioactive Waste Gamble: A “Friendly Neighbor” Until Profit Appears
The most recent example comes from Croatia’s decision to move forward with the disposal of radioactive waste at Trgovska Gora — directly on Bosnia’s border, in an earthquake‑prone region, and only a few hundred meters from homes, schools, orchards, and drinking water sources for more than 250,000 people in the Una River basin.
Despite years of appeals from Bosnia and Herzegovina, Croatia’s parliament voted to proceed. Seventy‑seven deputies supported the law. The message was unmistakable.
The mayor of Bosanski Novi, Miroslav Drljača, called it “another slap in the face from Croatia,” noting that Croatian authorities have refused to share research, environmental studies, or even basic planning documents with the communities that will be most affected. Croatia has not completed an environmental impact study, nor does it want Bosnia and Herzegovina to participate in one — yet construction work at the Čerkezovac site has already begun.
This is not an accident. It is a strategy.
Croatia presents itself to Brussels as a responsible EU member committed to regional cooperation, while simultaneously treating Bosnia and Herzegovina as a geopolitical dumping ground — literally. The Trgovska Gora project is not just an environmental threat; it is a demonstration of Croatia’s belief that Bosnia’s sovereignty is negotiable whenever Croatian interests demand it.
Serbia’s Parallel Game: Corruption, Paramilitaries, and Russian Leverage
While Croatia plays environmental roulette on Bosnia’s border, Serbia is engaged in its own destabilizing maneuvers — from high‑level corruption to hybrid warfare networks operating inside Bosnia and Herzegovina.
A recent scandal exposed how Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić’s close ally, Nikola Selaković, was indicted for falsifying documents to strip the former Yugoslav Army General Staff building of its protected status. The goal? To clear the way for a $500 million luxury development tied to Jared Kushner. Vučić publicly promised to pardon everyone involved. This is not the behavior of a state committed to rule of law — it is the behavior of a state committed to political loyalty and geopolitical bargaining.
But Serbia’s most dangerous export is not corruption. It is paramilitary radicalization.
A Telegraph investigation revealed that hundreds of Serbian militants — including veterans of the Bosnian war — have traveled to Ukraine to fight alongside Russian forces. They openly romanticize violence, promise to “return to reclaim what is ours,” and celebrate war criminals like Ratko Mladić. Some earn up to £23,000 for joining Russian units.
One of them, Dario Ristić, returned to Bosnia and Herzegovina after fighting with the Russian “Perm Bears” unit. Another, Davor Savičić — known as “The Wolf” — is a former member of Arkan’s Tigers and reportedly a colonel in Russia’s GRU, the same intelligence service behind the Novichok attack in the UK.
These are not isolated extremists. They are part of a network.
Republika Srpska as a Russian Training Ground
The most alarming detail is that Republika Srpska — under the leadership of Milorad Dodik — is increasingly being used as a Russian‑aligned paramilitary and hybrid warfare hub. Savičić was photographed with Dodik before Dodik’s meeting with Vladimir Putin. Western intelligence sources warn that Republika Srpska is being used the way East Germany once was: as a training ground for sabotage, drone warfare, and the orchestration of violent riots disguised as protests.
Testimony from the Moldova sabotage trials even suggests that operatives trained in Republika Srpska have already been involved in hybrid attacks across Europe.
This is not “neutrality.” It is not “non‑alignment.” It is a deliberate geopolitical alignment with Russia, executed through paramilitaries, disinformation, and destabilization — all while Serbia publicly claims to support peace and European integration.
The Pattern Is Clear
Croatia dumps radioactive waste on Bosnia’s border while preaching European values.
Serbia exports paramilitaries, corruption, and Russian influence while claiming to be a stabilizing force.
Both governments speak the language of diplomacy abroad and the language of destabilization at home. Their political satellites inside Bosnia and Herzegovina — HDZ BiH and SNSD — amplify these agendas, creating a coordinated pressure campaign against Bosnia’s sovereignty.
This is not new. It is simply the latest chapter in a centuries‑old strategy: weaken Bosnia, divide Bosnians, and present the state as ungovernable so that outside powers can carve out influence.
