Conversation with attorney Miloš Stevanović, author of the book “Flight Without Pause”

1. What was the goal of your book and who is the target audience?

First of all, allow me to thank the Capital.ba portal for its interest in the book “Flight Without Pause” and for the cooperation so far.

The book “Flight Without Pause – A Hero Is Not Born, a Hero Is Built” was not created out of a need for self-promotion. If the goal had been simply “to have a book,” it would have been much shorter and more pleasant.

The goal of the book is to bear witness to a certain period of time, from the perspective of a man who has been both inside the system and on its edges—as a lawyer, entrepreneur, and advisor—in business, banking, law, and politics.

The target audience consists of people who make decisions or are preparing to do so: young entrepreneurs, lawyers, managers, as well as those who want to understand how the system really works, not how it is described in textbooks. If the book encourages someone to think independently, it has fulfilled its purpose. Its goal is also to show how an idea can be turned into implementation.

I would like to note that the book is part of the educational platform “Miloš Masterclass” (www.milosmasterclass.com), which, in addition to the book, includes 16 video lessons in which I teach very concrete things from business and life, with a special focus on each individual’s mindset.

2. Do you consider yourself overly ambitious? You mention that you offered Milorad Dodik to take over the Government of Republika Srpska.

Ambition in itself is not a flaw—the problem arises when it is not grounded in knowledge and responsibility.

The proposal mentioned in the book was not an expression of political desire, but a techno-managerial idea at a time of serious economic challenges. The conversation with Milorad Dodik, which actually took place some 12–13 years ago, was proper and remained just that—a conversation. It was not accepted, but it showed that there was an awareness at the time that problems could not be solved solely through political slogans, but through knowledge and operational capability.

3. How did your “foray” into politics go, and what price did you pay?

I was the first city manager of a local community in Republika Srpska, and I approached that job operationally rather than ideologically. The result of that experience is a simple conclusion: politics consumes energy and rarely produces value.

The price was personal and professional—but useful. I learned where the system breaks, who blocks it, and why many good ideas are never realized. That knowledge is worth more today than any position. At that time, as well as today, the SDS was in power in Bijeljina, and Mayor Mićo Mićić had a vision and knew that Bijeljina needed to use its potential in the best possible way. We were moving toward making the city the center of economic and cultural life of this region, not only of Republika Srpska and Bosnia and Herzegovina. Unfortunately, I later paid the price for giving my maximum to that function with my health. However, every education has its price.

4. The story of Bata Bobar and the attempt to buy Telekom RS

In the book, I do not present sensationalism, but what was at the time an open secret in business circles.

Gavrilo Bobar had the ambition to regionally position capital and Bobar Bank. Discussions about Telekom RS were conducted in the context of privatizations of that time, with the search for financial support from abroad. The process was halted by a political compromise, which is not an exception but a rule in transitional economies. This is neither praise nor criticism—it is a fact. I would like to remind you that at that time, a quick decision was made for “Telekom Srbija” to buy our “Telekom” at a price that was astronomical at the time, but it brought capital to Republika Srpska, which I believe was needed then. If my memory serves me well, “Telekom Srbija” ultimately obtained a syndicated loan from Citibank in the United States and purchased the company.

5. Would Bobar Bank have survived if Gavrilo Bobar were alive?

In my opinion—it would have had a better chance, and I believe Mr. Bobar would have found a solution for its operations. Founders often carry the vision, authority, and balance that are difficult to institutionalize. After his death, the bank was left without a central figure at a time when the system was already unstable. But it is important to say: no bank collapses because of one man, but because of a combination of regulatory, market, and governance factors.

I believe the collapse of the bank was largely caused by related parties, but the trigger was Mr. Bobar’s death and the stampede of withdrawals, which no bank could have survived. Still, I am of the opinion that with adequate cooperation with the regulator, a solution to stabilize the bank could have been reached at that time.

6. In the book, you point out that you had several unsuccessful businesses. How can defeat be turned into victory, when should one withdraw, how can that be recognized, and is this actually the line that separates successful from unsuccessful people?

Failure is not the opposite of success—it is an integral part of it. In the book, as well as in the Masterclass, I continuously try to show readers and viewers that failure is not what we perceive it to be, but an opportunity from which a great deal can be learned and a solid foundation created for the future.

The key question is not “did you fall,” but whether you recognized the moment when you need to stop. Withdrawing is not weakness. Weakness is staying out of vanity. The difference between successful and unsuccessful people is often precisely in that line—the ability to acknowledge reality in time and redirect energy.

I believe that one of the key things people in our region need to understand is risk management. My entire life, as with bankers and all other businesspeople, comes down to how much risk I can absorb and to what limits in order to achieve a business result. For some businesses where I was very satisfied with the outcome, someone else might say it was a failure—for me, it was a big thing and a great success. It is all a matter of interpretation.

Courage is required to enter a business, and the most important thing in this interview, I am certain, is that an individual must have an absence of fear in their ideas. Every day I hear so many good ideas, but at the same time also the fear that prevails among people and starts with sentences like “That’s not for me,” “What if I fail,” and similar. The book teaches people precisely how to turn that biggest obstacle called fear into an advantage and how to tune the mind to positive frequencies.

7. You say that law as a science is losing its meaning and that law no longer exists today. On what do you base this claim?

Allow me to explain in more detail. My claim in the book is not that law should not exist, but that in practice it often does not function as a system of justice, but as a system of procedure. Law without justice becomes technique. Justice without law—chaos. My criticism is a call to restore meaning, not to dismantle the system. As a lawyer, I would most like this claim to be untrue one day.

However, what is becoming an increasingly common practice and an increasing problem, especially for businesspeople, is bureaucracy that insidiously infiltrates every pore of the law. You have situations where judges must meet quotas, various forms must be filled out, judges deal with fees and administrative tasks instead of being fully dedicated to law and legal science in order to reach fair and high-quality decisions. Furthermore, you have the beginning of chaos in international public law that returns things to ius imperii, meaning that the law of the stronger begins to apply again. This only confirms the thesis that history repeats itself.

8. Your law firm bought claims worth 180 million marks from the state Investment-Development Bank, which attracted great public attention in Republika Srpska. In the book, you state that investors lent you 20 million euros. Would you reveal who they are, or at least whether they are domestic or foreign?

Let me correct this immediately at the outset: it was not purchased by the law firm, but by our parent company “StandardPrva” d.o.o. The purchase of claims from the Investment-Development Bank of Republika Srpska was transparent, contractual, and legal. I would just like to note that the tender was public, and to my knowledge only one company from Banja Luka wanted to participate.

The investors who participated provided a loan of around 20 million euros, but due to contractual and business obligations, I cannot disclose their identities. However, I can say that we obtained the money based on our reputation and integrity. These are several firms—companies with which I have friendly relations, who trusted me and provided the funds.

I can say only one thing: this is serious capital, with clear return expectations, not political money. It would not be fair to reveal the sources; these are well-known domestic and international companies from Bosnia and Herzegovina and Serbia.

9. Is this the “deal of the century” for your company? We have read that you do not have many problems with collection. How is it that an individual is more successful than the state, which has numerous enforcement mechanisms? Where did the state go wrong?

Allow me to say at the outset that this is not the deal of the century, because we were faced with an enormous bureaucratic system with several thousand pages of documents. However, we had enough time before the purchase to conduct due diligence through a data room, which, thanks to our auditors who worked quickly and around the clock for several days, provided positive information. At the same time, two other colleagues who, together with me, represent a kind of management spent days deliberating precisely about the reputational risks you mention, because the attention surrounding this business has not subsided even after so much time. However, political opponents—whom we do not consider opponents at all—have presented so many untruths about us to the public, but we skillfully use the old saying: there is no bad marketing.

From a business perspective, for the company this is one of the most significant deals, but not the only one. The company did achieve significant revenue and profit that year, but we were fair and correct toward investors and paid out their shares and participations. There were truly good loans that were maximally collateralized, even by the strictest banking rules.

When you ask me about collection: the difference between a private entity and the state lies in focus and responsibility. The state has enforcement mechanisms, but often lacks strategy, continuity, and clear accountability. The IRB is a large institution whose primary job is not the collection of disputed claims, but the creation of new value through loan placement. In a portfolio of over a billion marks in assets, as I understand IRB has, it is logical that some loans will not be collected. We saw an opportunity in this, Deloitte gave its observations regarding the loans, and we assessed that we could absorb that level of risk.

A private entity has no luxury of error—either it collects, or it fails.

The state does not fail in its laws, but in management, and it is logical that there is not the same level of interest in collection among employees of a public company and those in a law firm. However, I must praise the employees of the IRB for managing a large portfolio that was not easy to handle. Sometimes you receive 20 to 30 submissions per day from courts in those cases alone, and all of them require attention.

Miloš Stevanović is an attorney from Bijeljina, an entrepreneur, and the owner of the “StandardPrva” d.o.o. group. He graduated from the Faculty of Law in Belgrade and pursued further education at Harvard in the USA and the London School of Economics in the United Kingdom. He is a member of the prestigious Royal Institute of International Affairs in London, as well as a member of the Serbian group of the Trilateral Commission. The book “Flight Without Pause” and the video tutorial can be purchased at www.milosmasterclass.com

/ / /

"Standard Prva" LLC Bijeljina is a company registered in Bijeljina at the District Commercial Court in Bijeljina. Company’s activities are accountancy, repurchases of receivables, angel investing and other related services. Distressed debt is a part of the Group within which the company repurchases the receivables, which function and are not returned regularly.

Lawyer’s Office Stevanović is the leading lawyer’s office in the region with the seat in Bijeljina. The LO abbreviation represents Lawyer’s Office of Vesna Stevanović and Lawyer’s Office of Miloš Stevanović.

Contact for media press@advokati-stevanovic.com or via telephone 00 387 55 230 000 or 00387 55 22 4444.