The cancellation of the tevhid in Sarajevo marking 40 days since the death of Ali Khamenei, the long-time Iranian ayatollah, is not a matter of principle but an obvious capitulation under pressure, political analyst Vojislav Savić said.
We present Savić’s column for ATV in full:
The cancellation of the tevhid in Sarajevo marking 40 days since the death of Ali Khamenei, the long-time Iranian ayatollah, is not a matter of principle, but a clear capitulation under pressure.
By canceling the announced religious event, no one changed their views—only the public stance was altered.
Within a large part of the Islamic Community and among its followers, there is a clear sense of closeness toward Iran. This did not arise overnight, nor can it be erased by canceling an event. It is a political and emotional reality that has existed for years.
When the time came to demonstrate this publicly once again, in the context of complex relations, a withdrawal followed.
Not because that sentiment no longer exists, but because of fear of consequences.
This quiet retreat, which is being concealed, reveals the essence of the situation and cannot hide the fact that Bosniak society is deeply divided—between what it feels and the decisions it ultimately makes.
They are aware that Iran was a key ally during the war in Bosnia and Herzegovina, and that hundreds of Iranians, including members of the IRGC as well as Qasem Soleimani and Fuad Shukr, fought alongside Muslims from Bosnia and Herzegovina.
The conflict they waged, including against more moderate Muslims from Bosanska Krajina, further sheds light on what Savić describes as both the wartime and ongoing political objectives. According to him, ties with the Iranian regime and with the Muslim Brotherhood remain embedded in the national fabric and cannot simply be erased, particularly among believers.
For domestic use, this narrative and sense of closeness are maintained, while toward the outside world, signals of caution and compliance are sent—until, as Savić claims, a moment arises when political conditions allow a return to previous positions.
The cancellation of the event is not a sign of a change in direction, but rather an indication that there are limits that cannot be crossed, regardless of underlying beliefs.
In Savić’s view, such a policy—attempting to reconcile internal sentiments with external constraints—ultimately leads to a gradual loss of credibility, both domestically and internationally. While it may appear effective in the short term, he concludes, such an approach has no long-term perspective.
Source: RTRS
