Anti-corruption watchdog Transparency International Bosnia and Herzegovina has warned that the revised framework risks undermining competitive procurement by directly designating a project partner.
It described the move as a “dangerous precedent” that could reduce transparency and increase the risk of political or commercial influence over a strategic asset.
Energy experts have raised similar concerns. Pippa Gallop, Southeast Europe energy adviser at Bankwatch Network, an NGO that monitors the environmental impact of international finance, has said the changes could bypass BH-Gas entirely and leave key elements of the project subject to opaque negotiations between the Federation government and a US private investor.
In January 2026, Covic confirmed that US-linked firms are exploring investment beyond pipeline infrastructure, including three gas-fired power plants in Bosnia and Herzegovina. These projects, reportedly considered for locations such as Mostar, central Bosnia and Tuzla, would be linked to the Southern Interconnection and supplied through LNG imports via Croatia’s Krk terminal, extending imported gas into domestic electricity generation.
In April, the UK Guardian reported that the EU’s representative in Sarajevo, Luigi Soreca, warned Bosnian officials that draft pipeline legislation needed to be coordinated with Brussels under existing energy agreements.
He said failure to do so could jeopardise Bosnia’s European integration path and future financial support. EU officials have also stressed that deviations from competitive procurement standards could complicate Bosnia’s accession process.
At the same time, figures linked to Trump have presented the project as part of a broader push to strengthen Bosnia’s energy security and reduce dependence on Russian gas.
Jesse Binnall, a lawyer for Trump who fronts AAFS, described the pipeline as a “priority for the Trump administration” and said the project would help deliver energy security and economic development for Bosnia and Herzegovina.
The contrast between Brussels’ emphasis on regulatory alignment and Washington’s support for accelerated private-sector involvement has made the Southern Interconnection a wider test of how strategic infrastructure projects in Bosnia are governed and financed.
Taken together, Bosnia’s energy landscape is increasingly defined by diverging external alignments as much as domestic political fragmentation. Republika Srpska continues to strengthen energy links with Serbia and existing Russian supply routes, while the Federation’s strategy is shaped by both EU regulatory expectations and growing US commercial involvement.
As infrastructure projects move from planning into implementation, these choices become harder to reverse. Contracts, supply chains and regulatory frameworks tend to lock in patterns of dependency that can persist for decades.
The Southern Interconnection was initially framed as a project intended to improve Bosnia and Herzegovina’s energy security and reduce vulnerability to external pressure. Yet the political disputes surrounding its implementation suggest that diversification alone does not necessarily produce greater cohesion. Instead, the country runs the risk that opposing domestic political interests could develop parallel energy systems.
The longer-term consequence may be an energy landscape that increasingly mirrors Bosnia and Herzegovina’s fragmented political structure itself: weakly coordinated at the state level, shaped by competing institutions and influenced by external actors with differing strategic priorities.
Martin Jenic is a graduate in International Relations from SOAS University of London. His research has focused on political and electoral dynamics in Bosnia and Herzegovina.
The opinions expressed are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of BIRN.