Bosnia & Herzegovina’s long and troubled path towards European Union membership risks drifting further into irrelevance unless Brussels restores credibility to its enlargement policy and applies its own rules more consistently, according to a new policy brief published by the European Policy Centre (EPC).

More than two decades after the EU positioned accession as a tool for post-war transformation, the country remains mired in political paralysis, weak institutions and stalled reforms. The EPC brief, titled ‘Unlocking Bosnia and Herzegovina’s EU accession path’, argues that the gap between rhetoric and reality has widened, undermining both the EU’s influence and Bosnia’s prospects.

“The EU framed Bosnia’s accession process as a vehicle for post-war state-building,” notes the brief by policy analyst Berta López Domènech, but “more than two decades later, the anticipated transformation remains incomplete and the country’s accession path is stalled.”

The report identifies a central contradiction at the heart of Bosnia’s EU trajectory: while Brussels presents enlargement as a merit-based process, in practice political considerations have repeatedly overridden reform performance.

This dynamic has become more visible since 2022, when Russia’s invasion of Ukraine revived geopolitical interest in enlargement. Bosnia was granted candidate status that year and received approval to open accession talks in 2024. Yet, according to the brief, these steps “resulted primarily from EU political impetus rather than sustained domestic reform performance.”

That pattern has continued. Key reforms required to formally launch negotiations, including judicial legislation and the appointment of a chief negotiator, remain blocked. Technical progress has also been limited, with most policy areas still classified as being at an “early stage” of alignment with EU standards.

Despite this, EU institutions have often framed developments in positive terms. The brief highlights a recurring tendency to validate incremental or incomplete reforms in order to maintain momentum, even when underlying structural issues persist.

Inconsistent conditionality erodes trust

A major source of the current impasse, the brief argues, lies in the EU’s inconsistent application of conditionality, the system of incentives and requirements designed to guide candidate countries towards membership.

“Conditionality is intended to make the EU accession process objective, predictable and performance-based,” the brief states. “However, in Bosnia and Herzegovina, the EU has applied conditionality inconsistently: backtracking on requirements, validating insufficient reforms and communicating poorly.”

Examples include shifting requirements around constitutional reform and the validation of legislation later deemed not fully aligned with EU standards. Such inconsistencies, the report argues, have weakened incentives for genuine reform while allowing domestic leaders to claim progress without delivering substantive change.

The result is a loss of credibility on both sides: Bosnian citizens increasingly doubt the EU’s commitment, while Brussels struggles to enforce its own benchmarks.

The report also points to entrenched political dynamics within Bosnia as a key obstacle. The country’s complex governance system, rooted in the Dayton Peace Agreement, has enabled nationalist leaders to block decision-making and maintain control over state institutions.

“Decision-making mechanisms have constantly been abused by nationalist leaders to block the normal functioning of institutions, serve their own interests and consolidate their share of power,” the brief says.

Rather than acting as a catalyst for reform, the accession process has often been “instrumentalised by political elites to advance sectarian agendas.” This has contributed to chronic institutional gridlock, with reforms delayed or diluted through political bargaining.

The situation has been particularly acute in Republika Srpska, where secessionist rhetoric and legislative measures targeting civil society and media have raised concerns about democratic backsliding.

Hungary’s role

The EPC brief places emphasis on the role of EU member states in shaping, and sometimes distorting, the enlargement process. Hungary features prominently in this context. Budapest under long-serving leader Viktor Orban emerged as a vocal supporter of Bosnian Serb leader Milorad Dodik, even after his conviction in 2025 for defying decisions of the international High Representative. Alongside Moscow, Hungary has maintained political engagement with Dodik, framing actions against him as unjustified external interference. However, the ousting of Orban’s Fidesz in this weekend’s elections means Budapest’s role is likely to change.

The brief notes that Hungary “has long backed his destabilising secessionist agendas,” reflecting a broader trend in which member states use enlargement policy to pursue their own geopolitical or domestic priorities.

This dynamic is part of a wider pattern of “instrumentalisation of the accession process,” where bilateral disputes or political alignments influence EU decision-making. Such interventions, the report warns, undermine the integrity of the enlargement framework and weaken the EU’s collective authority.

Another critical weakness identified in the brief is the marginalisation of civil society. While non-governmental organisations have played a key role in monitoring reforms and advocating for accountability, their involvement in the accession process remains limited.

“Civil society involvement remains limited, with little room for meaningful contribution,” the report states, describing consultations as often reduced to “a formal box-ticking exercise.”

This exclusion has broader consequences. By validating government-led progress without incorporating independent scrutiny, the EU risks reinforcing elite-driven decision-making and weakening democratic participation.

Civil society groups have repeatedly warned that some reforms are merely cosmetic and lack proper implementation. However, their influence on policy outcomes remains constrained.

Bosnia’s stalled progress comes as the EU focuses increasingly on frontrunner candidates such as Montenegro and on strategically significant applicants like Ukraine.

Montenegro aims to conclude negotiations by 2026, while discussions are underway on how to accelerate Ukraine’s accession. Against this backdrop, Bosnia risks being sidelined.

“Attention to frontrunners contrasts with the silence surrounding the laggards,” the brief notes.

Without renewed engagement, Bosnia could remain stuck in a holding pattern, particularly with national elections scheduled for October 2026. Political incentives for compromise are likely to be limited in the short term.

Six principles to restore momentum

To break the deadlock, the EPC outlines six principles aimed at restoring the EU’s credibility and reinvigorating Bosnia’s accession process.

First, it calls for predictable conditionality, with clear and consistent requirements at each stage. Any political decisions to advance the process despite unmet criteria should be communicated transparently.

Second, the EU should adopt a quality-based assessment, ensuring that reforms meet substantive standards rather than merely ticking procedural boxes.

Third, the report emphasises transparent political choices, arguing that the EU must be more honest about the political nature of enlargement decisions.

Fourth, it advocates for broader societal ownership, including structured participation for civil society and other stakeholders.

Fifth, it highlights the need for a serious constitutional reform debate, noting that changes to Bosnia’s governance framework are essential for meeting EU standards. “Constitutional negotiations should no longer take place behind closed doors and among only nationalist leaders,” the brief states.

Finally, it calls for a renewed political push and fair delivery, urging the EU to follow through on enlargement commitments when conditions are met. Ultimately, the report frames Bosnia’s stalled accession as a test case for the EU’s broader enlargement strategy. The bloc’s ability to balance geopolitical considerations with its rules-based framework will be critical not only for Bosnia but for other candidate countries as well.