The US signalled a major shift in its approach to Bosnia & Herzegovina’s international oversight on May 12, saying the next international peace envoy should have a reduced mandate, a stance that exposed growing differences among Western powers over how quickly the Balkan country should be left to govern without external intervention.

The remarks were made at a UN Security Council session on Bosnia, where outgoing High Representative Christian Schmidt confirmed he would step down in June after five years in office, prompting debate over the future of the powerful post created to oversee the 1995 Dayton peace agreement that ended Bosnia’s war.

The Office of the High Representative (OHR), established under the US-brokered Dayton accords, was originally designed to monitor civilian implementation of the peace deal. But in 1997 its authority was expanded under the so-called Bonn Powers, allowing the High Representative to impose laws and dismiss elected officials deemed to be violating the peace settlement.

Washington suggested on May 12 that era may be drawing to a close.

“The OHR was never intended to be permanent,” Tammy Bruce, the US deputy representative to the United Nations, told the Security Council, Reuters reported. “Success for a High Representative means leaving a successor with a far more limited set of responsibilities.”

Bruce said the departure of Schmidt, a German politician who took office in 2021, marked the completion of “one phase of the international presence” in Bosnia, and that the next envoy should focus on transferring responsibility to domestic institutions rather than intervening directly in political disputes.

“The next High Representative’s task will be to transfer responsibility for running and maintaining those institutions to local leaders,” she said. “One day, there will no longer be a need for such a role.”

Her comments pointed to a potentially major recalibration of international policy toward Bosnia, which remains deeply divided along ethnic lines nearly three decades after the war between Bosniaks, Serbs and Croats.

Under Dayton, Bosnia was divided into two largely autonomous entities — Republika Srpska and the Bosniak-Croat Federation — tied together by a weak central government. The arrangement ended the conflict but entrenched ethnic vetoes and a cumbersome political system that has often paralysed decision-making.

Schmidt used his final appearance before the Council to warn that Bosnia’s fragile constitutional order remained under threat, particularly from Bosnian Serb leaders whom he accused of systematically weakening state institutions.

“We are witnessing deliberate attempts to deconstruct state-level institutions by blocking them and preventing them from performing the responsibilities they were created for,” Schmidt said while presenting his twice-yearly report, in a speech broadcast on YouTube.

“Peace, democracy, and constitutional order for Bosnia and Herzegovina should not be left to erode gradually and deliberately,” he added.

Schmidt did not directly respond to the US proposal for a narrower mandate for his successor. He said his decision to leave was personal, describing it as “evidently time for a new start and change.”

At the end of the session, Schmidt defended his record and said Bosnia still needed international engagement.

“I’m not leaving. I will stay in mind and will stay with you,” he said. “I will fight for the rights of those who are suppressed … because only they have another denomination, other ethnic background.”

The question of what happens after Schmidt’s departure is likely to dominate a meeting of the Peace Implementation Council (PIC), the international body overseeing Dayton, in Sarajevo in early June. Bruce said Washington was open to supporting a joint candidate but also hinted the United States could put forward its own nominee.

“We hope to work with all of you, but we also have our own candidates in mind if need be,” she said, adding that “it is imperative that a successor be in place by the end of June to ensure stability heading into the fall election campaign.”

That position contrasted sharply with statements from the UK and France, both of which publicly argued that the OHR should retain its full powers until Bosnia completes reforms required for the closure of the office under the long-delayed “5+2” agenda, a set of conditions agreed in 2008.

The United Kingdom said it continued to back “a fully empowered High Representative as the cornerstone of civilian implementation of Dayton.”

“The report and ongoing political challenges underline why the High Representative, including the use of executive powers where necessary, remains vital,” Britain’s UN envoy James Kariuki told the Council, as quoted in a Foreign Office statement.

London said Bosnia’s political environment remained volatile, citing institutional obstruction, allegations of electoral fraud in Republika Srpska, and rhetoric advocating secession or the creation of a third Croat-majority entity.

“Bosnia and Herzegovina’s future cannot be held hostage by divisive politics,” Kariuki said. “Divisive rhetoric, including calls for secession or a third entity, is anti-Dayton and risks peace and stability.”

France struck a similar tone, saying the international civilian presence remained essential to preserving stability and supporting Bosnia’s path toward European Union membership.

“The international presence in Bosnia and Herzegovina remains necessary to ensure the stability of the country and the region,” France’s UN ambassador Jérôme Bonnafont said, according to an official statement. “France reiterates its support for the Office of the High Representative.”

Russia, by contrast, repeated its longstanding opposition to the OHR and called for its immediate closure, describing the institution as an instrument of Western interference.

“To date, the main source of instability in Bosnia and Herzegovina remains the Office of the High Representative,” Russia’s representative told the Council, N1 reported.

“We insist on the immediate closure of the OHR. This is the very first necessary step towards stabilisation of the situation in Bosnia and Herzegovina,” he said.

Moscow has never recognised Schmidt’s appointment, arguing it was invalid because it was not endorsed by the Security Council due to Russian and Chinese objections. Bosnian Serb leader Milorad Dodik has used that argument to reject Schmidt’s authority, while frequently clashing with the OHR over attempts to strengthen Bosnia’s central institutions.

Schmidt’s departure comes after years of escalating political tensions, with Dodik repeatedly threatening secession and boycotting state institutions. Western diplomats have accused him of undermining the Dayton framework, while he and his allies say the international community has overstepped its mandate and prevented Bosnia from functioning as a sovereign state.

The United States suggested some progress had been made, pointing to the withdrawal of secessionist legislation in Republika Srpska and recognition of the authority of Bosnia’s Constitutional Court.

Bruce also sought to frame the transition as neither a win for Bosnian Serbs nor a defeat for those favouring strong international oversight.

“This is not a victory or defeat for any party or group in Bosnia and Herzegovina, but a recognition of the completion of one phase of the international presence,” she said.

Bosnia is due to hold general elections in October, a vote likely to test whether the country’s rival ethnic leaders can move beyond the nationalist politics that have dominated public life since the war.

For many diplomats, the timing of Schmidt’s resignation raises concern that the debate over his successor could itself become a source of instability. Whether the next High Representative arrives with reduced powers, as Washington suggests, or with the same sweeping authority backed by London and Paris, may shape Bosnia’s political trajectory for years to come. The core dispute is no longer whether the OHR should eventually close — all major powers agree it should — but whether Bosnia’s institutions are robust enough to stand without the extraordinary powers that have underpinned the peace settlement since Dayton.