The International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies (IFIMES)[1] based in Ljubljana, Slovenia, regularly conducts analyses of events spanning the Middle East, the Balkans, and global affairs. IFIMES analyses the current situation in the Republic of Serbia as 2024 draws to a close, with a particular focus on the latest attempts to destabilise the country. From the analysis “Serbia 2024: Serbia between East and West,” we highlight the most important and intriguing excerpts.
The election of Donald Trump as the new President of the United States introduces a new global reality. Elon Musk is emerging as the spokesperson for the new American foreign policy and the ongoing internal restructuring in the US.
The United States is facing numerous domestic challenges while striving to reassert strong leadership on the global stage. The new American administration’s first major test will be bringing an end to the wars in Ukraine and Gaza. Following these actions, its approach to Russia and China will become clearer.
While the Western Balkans will certainly not be a priority for American foreign policy, the complex situations in Kosovo and Bosnia and Herzegovina will need to be addressed, particularly as tensions in North Macedonia continue to escalate. It remains to be seen how the new American administration will view individual countries in the Western Balkans, with particular attention on its stance toward Serbia. The question is whether countries with strong ties to Russia and China can expect stronger support from the Trump administration.
Over the past few years, Serbia has significantly strengthened its relationship with the United States, as evidenced by numerous developments, most notably in the signing of this year’s strategic Energy Cooperation Agreement[2] between the two countries. This agreement demonstrates strong support from the US government for clean energy investments, as a means to drive the green transition and foster sustainable development.
Under the leadership of President Aleksandar Vučić, Serbia has employed pragmatic policies to convince its public of the importance of deepening ties with the United States, the world’s foremost superpower. This is particularly important because Serbia holds a central position in the region, making it nearly impossible to resolve any regional issue without its involvement. Finalising the dialogue between Serbia and Kosovo will remain a priority for the EU, but it cannot be resolved without the active and decisive role of the US. Unlike previous administrations in Serbia, which largely pursued confrontational policies toward the United States, Vučić has opted to build friendships and foster partnership relations.
Serbia has strengthened its relations with Ukraine by voting in the UN General Assembly to clearly condemn Russia’s invasion of Ukraine as a violation of international law. Serbia’s substantial aid to Ukraine further underscores its commitment to the European path, with the ultimate aim of attaining EU membership.
While Serbia has successfully repositioned itself within regional and international relations, Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has reshaped Europe’s geopolitical landscape, heralding a historic rift between Europe and Russia. Given the current geopolitical realities, it is of utmost importance for the EU to finally embark on an intensive enlargement process, as this would serve as an effective response to ward off all foreign (undesirable) influences on the Western Balkans.
Announcements of sanctions against the Oil Industry of Serbia (Naftna industrija Srbije - NIS), ), which has been majority-owned by two Russian energy companies since 2008, during the administration of Boris Tadić and Vojislav Koštunica, raise concerns about supply and energy stability. The sanctions imposed on NIS by the United States are directed at NIS specifically, not Serbia, as the company’s majority owners are two Russian firms that serve as vital pillars of Russia’s energy sector and, by extension, its state funding.
Analysts suggest that Serbia’s leadership, through dialogue with its partners and allies, will likely find a viable solution to secure the supply of oil and oil derivatives, ensuring the country’s energy stability remains unaffected. Given Serbia’s strong financial position, it is feasible that the country could reclaim an ownership stake in NIS, thereby averting the proposed sanctions.
Serbia’s relationship with the Russian Federation will continue to be a crucial factor in the future dynamics of the Balkans and its ties with the EU. Serbia has established well-defined relationships with Russia, China, the EU, and the US. The Russian Federation's defeat in Syria sends a strong message to all of its partners. A comparable scenario unfolded when the US withdrew from Afghanistan, and Donald Trump is now launching an investigation into the pullout and the abandonment of American military equipment to the Taliban. The world is bracing for Trump’s return, and Serbia is no exception. Student protests in Serbia serve as a prelude that is likely to bolster the current government’s policies. While Serbia maintains its approach, the leadership of Republika Srpska, which has become a typical Russian proxy, complicates Serbia’s position amid the geopolitical shifts triggered by Trump’s return.
Serbia stands at a geopolitical crossroads, entangled in diverse interests. Over the past few years, we have repeatedly cautioned that efforts to destabilise the country would emerge and escalate over time—warnings that have now been validated. The legacy of the dissolution of the former Yugoslavia and several ensuing wars continue to weigh heavily, as Serbia grapples with overcoming lingering crises. The Western Balkans as a region still suffers from a lack of adequate reckoning with its past. Therefore, the numerous deviant phenomena in these societies come as no surprise and should not necessarily be blamed on former or current governments. Serbia’s internal challenges are no greater than those of other nations; what truly matters is how it addresses these issues and seeks effective solutions to the problems it faces.
Serbia is currently experiencing a historic peak in its economic development. Relevant domestic and international indicators place Serbia among the leading European countries in terms of intensive economic growth[3]. A World Bank (WB) report[4] highlights the country’s recovery following the Covid-19 pandemic and the improvement in its investment rating, recognised by leading international credit rating[5] agencies. These developments have consequently led to an increase in both domestic and foreign investments, contributing to the overall progress of the country.
Civic activism and efforts to address societal phenomena, particularly deviant ones, should contribute to fostering a harmonious and responsible society. The concept of active citizenship encourages individuals to actively participate in their communities. It involves collaborative efforts to shape society and tackle public issues at local, national, and international levels. This, in turn, reinforces democratic processes and promotes the inclusion of all citizens within the society.
Active citizenship must be further promoted to ensure internal social cohesion and achieve societal consensus on Serbia’s future and overall progress.
The state, or more specifically the government, must act responsibly, with state institutions serving the interests of the country and its citizens. It is crucial that citizens have trust in institutions and elected officials. Serbia has a tradition of mass protests, which have become a hallmark of its political culture.
It is precisely active citizenship that underscores the importance of the rule of law and robust state institutions. This also means that publicly expressed opinions in the streets do not imply that governments can be overthrown or installed through street demonstrations. In democratic societies, democratic elections remain the only legitimate path to power, and Serbia should be no exception to this principle. Serbia and its leading political figures must undertake a form of self-reflection concerning the nation’s current state and future direction.
Aleksandar Vučić's tenure has not been without its shortcomings. Mistakes have been made, naturally leading to public dissatisfaction. The Serbian President’s announcements of a decisive crackdown on crime and corruption, along with plans to “shake up” the ranks of his Serbian Progressive Party (SNS), are encouraging. The anticipated government reshuffle represents a step in this direction. This is a genuine path toward purging society of this scourge. At the same time, it is essential to nurture a culture of dialogue and forge a new political ethos.
Analysts believe that student protests have introduced a fresh dynamic to Serbia’s social landscape and that this momentum should be responsibly leveraged to drive meaningful improvements across all areas of society. Achieving this requires accountability from all stakeholders and safeguards against the misuse of student protests for ulterior motives. The voice of students should serve as a catalyst for self-reflection and a guiding lesson for the future, firmly aimed at reinforcing democracy. For this reason, it is crucial that students rise above the current challenges, shed light on societal conditions and problems, and remain vigilant against being co-opted for partisan interests or foreign agendas.
Serbia’s painful experiences with secessionism during the era of Slobodan Milošević are a chapter no one wants to see repeated. Milošević’s rule ultimately resulted in Kosovo’s secession, leaving a lasting scar on Serbia’s collective consciousness. The EU has been mediating a dialogue between Belgrade and Pristina, but meaningful discussions have been stalled for years. The negotiations have reached a deadlock, and it is expected that the new political leadership in Brussels and Washington will accelerate the dialogue, culminating in the signing of a comprehensive, legally binding agreement. Kosovo remains the “open wound” of relations in the Western Balkans, as some politicians still nurture hopes of changing state borders and reshaping the region’s political architecture.
This is why statements made by certain politicians or segments of the public during protests in Novi Sad, which carry secessionist overtones regarding Vojvodina, have sparked concerns and apprehension in Serbia. It is vital to ensure that protests and active citizenship are neither misused nor directed toward secession and that free democratic expression by citizens, political parties, the government, or the opposition is not exploited for narrow political or partisan interests. It is no secret that some international and domestic circles have no interest in seeing Serbia become strong, influential, and prosperous.
The opposition plays a vital role in any democratic society, monitoring government policies with the aim of rationalising them or highlighting shortcomings and errors that may arise in the management of public affairs by the executive branch. A constructive opposition is a legitimate right and a cornerstone of building a democratic society. Protests and the peaceful expression of opinions are integral democratic practices recognised across all democratic systems. The essence of democracy lies in safeguarding the state within the boundaries of the constitution and laws, while also preserving and strengthening other state institutions. A clear distinction exists between constructive opposition, which strives to address and rectify mistakes for the greater good of the nation and its citizens, and destructive opposition, which deliberately searches for mistakes aiming to destabilise, undermine security and stability, and push the state into a spiral of violence and chaos.
Even more striking is the conduct of certain segments of the opposition and the so-called “independent” media in Serbia. Their approach falls far short of exemplifying professionalism or civic standards, teetering on the threshold of minimal professional norms, thereby undermining their own credibility and, paradoxically, fuelling public grievances against the government.
Rather than directing public dissatisfaction toward constructive criticism or proposing viable alternatives, the opposition and their allied media have acted in ways that undermine the very causes they claim to champion. Instead of raising the standards of public discourse, their reliance on sensationalism, misrepresentation, and unprofessional reporting has diluted the focus on legitimate flaws of the government. Some opposition leaders have openly acknowledged foreign backing for their activities, which is viewed negatively in Serbia. This approach has diminished the public’s ability to take their grievances seriously, inadvertently shielding the government from sustained accountability. By muddying the waters of public discourse, these actors have paradoxically enabled the government to postpone meaningful scrutiny.
Serbia finds itself caught in the midst of geopolitical crosswinds, with foreign actors from both the West and the East vying for influence. The country has firmly committed to EU membership as its strategic objective. Countering foreign influence requires prudent and responsible policymaking. Serbia needs to reassess who its genuine friends are, both in the West and the East.
On the journey toward EU membership, Serbia must embrace and implement the best practices and lessons learned from countries that have previously navigated the European path. However, it is regrettable that neighbouring states or other EU member countries often hinder candidate nations on account of their bilateral interests. A notable example is Bulgaria’s blockade of North Macedonia’s EU accession process, by obstructing the start of negotiations due to bilateral disputes. Croatia has displayed similar behaviour, particularly in its approach to Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia, and Montenegro.
In response to these challenges, Slovenia and Germany have drafted a non-paper proposing the elimination of vetoes and blockades stemming from unresolved bilateral issues with neighbouring countries during the pre-accession process. Furthermore, the introduction of qualified majority voting (QMV) in the EU accession process has been suggested to prevent obstructions from certain existing EU members during membership negotiations with candidate countries. Fast-tracked EU membership remains the only viable response to counter negative trends, foreign influence, and anti-European policies in the Western Balkans.
Ljubljana/Washington/Bruxelles/Belgrade, 30 December 2024
[1] IFIMES - International Institute for Middle East and Balkan Studies, based in Ljubljana, Slovenia, has a special consultative status with the United Nations Economic and Social Council ECOSOC/UN in New York since 2018, and it is the publisher of the international scientific journal “European Perspectives”, link: https://www.europeanperspectives.org/en
[2] Remarks at the U.S.-Serbia Energy Cooperation Agreement Signing Ceremony. Available at: https://www.state.gov/remarks-at-the-u-s-serbia-energy-cooperation-agreement-signing-ceremony/
[3] 2024 Communication on EU enlargement policy. Available at: https://neighbourhood-enlargement.ec.europa.eu/document/download/3c8c2d7f-bff7-44eb-b868-414730cc5902_en?filename=Serbia%20Report%202024.pdf
[4] World Bank: Recent Economic Developments. Available at: https://www.worldbank.org/en/country/serbia/overview#3
[5] Republic of Serbia’s long-term credit rating. Available at: https://nbs.rs/en/finansijsko_trziste/informacije-za-investitore-i-analiticare/rejtng_RS/
