Los políticos que han evitado luchar por el Estado y el pueblo no tienen derecho a llamar a los defensores.

Premier Andrej Plenković declared during an interview with Croatian Television (HRT) that he has lost trust in General Tihomir Kundid, chief of the General Staff of the Armed Forces. The statement came after Plenković criticized Kundid’s refusal to attend a meeting at the government office, which he described as a serious mistake. In response, former Prime Minister Jadranka Kosor took to social media to challenge Plenković’s remarks, accusing him of undermining military leaders while failing to demonstrate personal commitment to national defense. The incident unfolded on July 16, 2026, when Plenković addressed the nation through HRT, emphasizing his administration's continued investment in strengthening Croatia’s armed forces. He highlighted increased defense spending and efforts to modernize the military, yet expressed disappointment over Kundid’s decision not to comply with an official summons. According to Plenković, this lack of cooperation has led to a loss of confidence, though he clarified that the issue was not personal but rather stemmed from poor judgment. Kosor responded swiftly via Twitter, condemning Plenković’s comments as hypocritical. She accused political figures who have avoided direct involvement in defending the state and its citizens of having no right to criticize soldiers. Her message was sharp and pointed, stating that only those who have fought for their country deserve to question the loyalty of military personnel. She concluded her post with a metaphorical remark, “U mišju rupu,” which translates to “In a mouse hole,” suggesting that such criticism lacks substance. Both Plenković and Kosor have been prominent political figures in Croatia, each holding the position of prime minister at different times. Plenković currently leads the ruling party, while Kosor served as premier from 2004 to 2009 before stepping down due to health reasons. Their public exchange marks one of the more contentious moments in recent Croatian politics, highlighting ongoing tensions between civilian leadership and the military establishment. The controversy has sparked discussions among political analysts and commentators, many of whom note the historical sensitivity surrounding relations between the executive branch and the armed forces in Croatia. Since the end of World War II, the role of the military in national affairs has remained a subject of debate, particularly regarding the balance between civilian control and operational independence. Plenković’s remarks appear to reflect concerns about the effectiveness and accountability of military leadership, while Kosor’s response underscores broader ideological differences about the responsibilities of politicians versus soldiers. Political observers suggest that the dispute could influence upcoming legislative agendas, especially concerning defense policy and the structure of military command. Both sides have framed their positions around national security and patriotism, making it difficult to resolve the conflict through dialogue alone. As the situation develops, further statements from both parties are anticipated, potentially leading to renewed scrutiny of military governance in Croatia.