This episode explores the current political organizing stemming from mass student-led protests in Serbia against corruption of the regime. Why are Serbian students suspicious of the political establishment, including all political parties in the opposition? And what are the strategic dilemmas for the future direction of the protests? Listen to hear how accession to the EU could impact Serbia’s ongoing struggle for democratization.
Our guest: Ivanka Popović
Democracy in Question? is brought to you by:
• Central European University: CEU
• The Albert Hirschman Centre on Democracy in Geneva: AHCD
• The Podcast Company: scopeaudio
Follow us on social media!
• Central European University: @weareceu.bsky.social
• Albert Hirschman Centre on Democracy in Geneva: @ahcdemocracy.bsky.social
Subscribe to the show. If you enjoyed what you listened to, you can support us by leaving a review and sharing our podcast in your networks!
Shalini Randeria (SR): Welcome to a new episode of Democracy in Question, the podcast series that explores the challenges democracies are facing around the world. I'm Shalini Randeria, rector and president of Central European University in Vienna, and senior fellow at the Albert Hirschman Center on Democracy at the Graduate Institute, Geneva.
This is the seventh episode of Season 10 of Democracy in Question. I'm really pleased to welcome back Ivanka Popovic, who is professor at the Faculty of Technology and Metallurgy at the University of Belgrade, Serbia. As I mentioned last fortnight, she was the first woman president of the Serbian Chemical Society and a member of the executive board of the European Chemical Society.
Between 2006 and 2012, she was the first woman dean of the faculty, and from 2018 to 2021, she served as the rector of the University of Belgrade. During her tenure, the university became a member of the European University Alliance and adopted a gender equality plan, as well as regulation on prevention and protection against sexual harassment.
Ivanka Popovic is a renowned scholar working on polymer engineering and sustainable development. She's also the vice president of the European University Association and an honorary president of the Danube Rectors’ Conference. In 2023, Ivanka played a key role in forming with fellow academics and intellectuals, the civic initiative called ProGlas[i], about which she will also tell us today.
Today's episode is the second part of a fascinating conversation we started two weeks ago when we discussed the mass protests that have been going on in Serbia for more than half a year now. In the first part of our conversation, we focused on how a sustained movement was brought about by the moral outrage against the corrupt regime of President Vucic.
It was triggered by the collapse of a roof canopy that killed 16 people in Novi Sad in November 2024. We also talked about the rich tradition of student mobilization in Serbia and the role of universities as catalysts of successful student protests. Ivanka also tried to explain why students are keeping political parties at arm’s length.
Finally, we discussed the harsh measures adopted by the government against university faculty and administration who have joined the student-led nationwide protests. These measures by the regime blatantly violate academic freedom and university autonomy: two crucial pillars of a liberal democracy. In today's episode, we address some key questions about what consolidates President Vucic’s soft authoritarian rule.
We discuss the contested meanings of political engagement, the fragmented nature of the Serbian opposition, and the broader regional, as well as geopolitical context. We focus first on the tactics used by the regime to perpetuate its hold over power in Serbia in the past 12 years. Can student-led protests alone successfully challenge the regime?
Who are the other actors that could potentially make a dent in President Vucic’s armor? What role have oppositional political parties played so far? I'll also ask Ivanka to talk about the forms of civic engagement and activism, including the forum ProGlas that she herself is an active member of. And finally, we'll turn to the regional and the geopolitical context in which Serbia is enmeshed.
I'll invite Ivanka to comment on the unexpected promises of ethnic reconciliation in a region historically rife with ethnic tantrums. But also, to analyze the economic interests and political machinations of various superpowers, Russia, as well as China. I'll conclude by asking why the European Union can ill afford to continue its pragmatic, transactional relationship with Vucic regime.
Ivanka, welcome back to the podcast. It's wonderful to have you with me once again today, and thank you so much for joining me,
Ivanka Popovic (IP): Shalini, thank you for having me. It's an honor to be here. I'm grateful for the opportunity to present to a broader audience what is going on in Serbia, because I think what is going on here is related to fundamental values that Western society believes in, and that's why it should be an important topic for all of us.
SR: Ivanka in the previous episode, you concluded by mentioning the students may be slowly becoming more political in their demands, that they are now formulating some broader demands that go beyond focusing solely on culpability for the Novi Sad tragedy. Could you explain why the students are so hesitant about involving political parties and inviting them to the table to make common calls with them?
You said in our earlier conversation a fortnight ago that the students are very deliberately keeping their movement leaderless. This is because of, of course, their past experience of the government being able to co-opt a few leaders. So, remaining without leaders is also a measure to protect themselves and their movement.
But I'm wondering if there is hesitancy about any involvement of political parties. Also, because students are disappointed with the existing opposition parties, or is it something more fundamental? Is it that students are ideologically invested in a sort of Eastern European anti-politics, if I may call it that? That is, they would rather uphold the purity of an autonomous civil society untouched by political parties who are seen as being a corrupting influence.
IP: Well, yes. There is a very strong element of anti-political or non-political, but I would put it in a different context because we have to look at the students. The government of Mr. Vucic has been in power for 13 years, so since childhood, they know of no other way of ruling. Mr. Vucic has demonized all of his opponents and everything that is bad in Serbia is due to those who were in power before him. So, he has been demonizing these others and saying he's the only righteous one who is doing what is correct for the Serbian population and people, and everybody else is, more or less, a traitor. I'm simplifying, but I think you get my gist. This is for him a continuous campaign and the opposition parties under such pressure and blackballing don't have much operating space. They are not very visible. And I have to say, they have not always made the best decisions.
So, one aspect is the way Mr. Vucic has been keeping them under the radar and portraying them as the enemy. The other aspect is that they have not managed to be united in their struggle. I would say this is a struggle that requires unification across the board regardless of ideology. All opposition forces, activists, politicians, grassroots movements, everyone needs to come together just with the simple goal of getting this ruling party out of governance. Because if you set the conditions for fair and free elections, we can talk about ideologies and who will win proper elections.
Mr. Vucic and his party are actually strangling the country and not allowing for a normal political process to be going on. So, in that respect this propaganda, that politics are dirty and decent people don't engage in politics, has worked very well on the subconscious mind not only of the students, but also of many citizens in Serbia who will just say, “they're all the same. It doesn't really matter who's in power”. And of course it does matter. It's very clear that it does matter. So, in trying to keep the movement pure and untainted by what could be criticized by others, students have distanced themselves from all opposition parties and even activists and local movements, because they don't want the goals that they're going for to be in any way tainted.
What I think is that we have to be realistic that the protests will continue, that it's feasible they go into the fall, all the way to the end of the year. And the students need to be wise. And of course, nobody expected the students to be the ones to carry the full load on their shoulders. We all somehow thought that we would share this load. But now because the students are a guarantee of the righteousness of the cause, all political actors are actually waiting for the students togive a sign of the next steps. So, I think at the moment we're entering a very difficult stage of the protests.
SR: These are not the first large scale protests against the Vucic regime that we have seen. He's held power since 2012, and he doesn't seem to be at risk of losing his grip on power. And so, despite so much dissatisfaction with his government, how did he manage to win the last election so comfortably?
IP: Well, this is one of those very interesting points of discussion also in Serbia. When he was elected in 2012, he did get the majority vote because it was also a protest vote againstthe previous government that citizens were not satisfied with their performance. And Mr. Vucic came with a formally pro-European agenda which turned out to be sort of a mimicking of these things. And as he started governing, this enthusiasm of the people was there, there was a focus on national pride and these aspects, which I think was resounding well with a certain part of the population. But as the ruling party installed itself in power and started taking control of various institutions initially you could not see the consequences of this corruption.But as the years were passing, it became more and more obvious what was going on. Then there were some really important events that affected the situation. First, there is the very complicated situation in the educational system in Serbia where teachers are really paid very poorly and kept on these short-term contacts. So that they can be controlled not to strike. And amidst all of this, there were these tragedies with these mass shootings a few years ago in a Belgrade school and in two villages near Belgrade, where young people were senselessly killed by mass shooters. These events really shook the nation and there were outcries for something to change. And the opposition supported citizen protest also displaying grief, but also asking for changes. And these protests went on for months. So that was, let's say, a first mass wave that we saw.
And then what we saw two summers ago were the mass protests related to the Jadar Valley project that is actually a Rio Tinto investment in a lithium mine that has been wholeheartedly supported by the Serbian government. And now I do not want to go into any details about the lithium mining technology, which can be discussed one way or another. The point is the process of how the government, in a very non-transparent way, was actually allowing the company to get certain permits to try to evict people from their land. And the second point of interest is that this is fertile agricultural land that is not a usual location as a mining facility. We said, okay, we will sacrifice the agricultural land. The key point is that below this area is the most important aquifer, water reservoir, that is already playing a major role in supplying this part of Serbia and Belgrade with drinking water. One other point is that this is western part of Serbia. In the eastern part of Serbia, we have already seen the devastating effects of mining projects that are at the moment led by the Chinese. Previously, there were other companies, so I would not say it's just exclusively related to the Chinese. But there are copper mines and the devastation of the eastern part of Serbia in terms of the pollution of soil, air, water, has been such that I think it will take generations for this to improve. So, people have seen what happens and they simply don't want this to spread. Serbia is a small country, you have nowhere to escape from the effects of this. So, we had a summer of massive protests all over Serbia that were against this type of action that would threaten national interests, not in terms of strategic interests but existential.
So, this was also a wave. And I would say this is now a third wave with the student-led protests, we are reaching the essence because the previous protests, also at their essence, had the issue of abuse of power and corruption. So, it's the manifestation of the same thing again, and again and again. Many young people in Serbia thought, well, they could go elsewhere. They would leave Serbia. But these opportunities are actually diminishing. And they have come to the realization that they want a future in Serbia, and they want a future in Serbia that has some promise of some possibility of a normal life.
So we see a cumulative effect of these protests. And I think what we also see that people who have not been politically engaged and even members of the ruling party have seen already with the case of this lithium mine, that something is not quite right in Serbia. And that they have brought into doubt all of the decisions that the ruling party is making. So, it's a significant change.
SR: Could you say something, Ivanka, about other sets of key actors? I'm thinking for example, of judges or lawyers who could also join in and decisively influence the outcome for this struggle, which has become a major struggle then not only for university autonomy and academic freedom, but also democratization and a rule of law. I'm asking this because back in 1996-97, when the students played a prominent role in the protests against the Milosevic regime, the mobilization culminated that the recognition of Zoran Djindjic as the legitimately elected mayor of Belgrade and. If I recall correctly, that was the time when the success of that wave of protest depended on the Serbian Armed Forces switching sides and joining with the protestors. To what extent does the Vucic regime have a totally tight control over the military and the police force, and would they then use these in order to really squash the protest?
IP: I think Mr. Vucic would have no qualms about using force and using the military and the police, but from what I've seen, he doesn't seem to trust the military. He is relying more on the police, but the police also, they're very reluctant now to go against people they know. These students could be the sons and daughters of their neighbors. Of course, this is the police special forces. Like the SWAT, the guys that look like commandos, not like normal police. And of course, then there is this hoodlum army, of these violent, for example, sports supporters, like the football hooligans.
These are let's say, semi-criminal groups of mercenaries, they are more than willing to participate in such activities for an appropriate fee. So, I think money is also being spent in that area. Now, whether Mr. Vucic will use this or not, of course, depends on the development of the situation, but recalling Mr. Djindjic, it was a slightly different set of circumstances, as I said, because we had a combined opposition, students, citizens. It was really a massive civic movement. And also, we had the charisma and genius of Mr. Djindjic. We do not have such a figure now, and this can and does make a difference.
SR: The Serbian opposition is incredibly fragmented: there are some 30 parties in no less than 17 parliamentary groups and caucuses, which has rendered them de facto impotent. And as you mentioned earlier, Vucic has also been rather effective in demonizing the opposition for a very long time. Do you think that many voters may have been alienated due to their suspicions of the partial complicity, and even participation, of opposition parties in the political machine of the regime? One can sense, therefore, a strong desire on the part of the demonstrators to change the system itself by now. Would you agree?
IP: I would say now we have these opposition parties who have very correctly assessed the situation in Serbia. They have been very active in indicating various issues of corruption, of illegal activities of the government. And somehow people don't respond sufficiently to this as if they're so used to things going on in Serbia like this. The basic weakness of the opposition parties in Serbia is that they have not been able to unite. And this was one of the major problems in the previous elections. And even when you had the idea that maybe they were one step to uniting, in the end they didn't. And this has made people very frustrated, angry, and now ready to simply not accept these opposition parties.
SR: What about other collective actors outside the sphere of professional party politics or parliament? Could you say something about the role of civic movements and activists? To what extent have the student protests spilled over to the rest of Serbian society to mobilize broader social groups, which could ultimately form the basis of a strong alliance across especially the urban-rural divide?
IP: We have had a lot of civic grassroots movements. One very strong movement is the environmental one about this Jadar Valley project. you have the local activists, the politicians who have been working at a local level on community issues. And they have been emerging a new political force because they've been gaining experience at the local community level. And they have been quite successful in fighting the ruling party within the local elections. And I think they have gained enough experience that they could move forward to national elections.
If we look at professional groups, we have of course the teachers as the staunchest supporters of the students. The lawyers, they came in very early in the process. And the lawyers had various strikes of a few days, one day, a few days a week. In the end, they had a one-month strike. But I have to say, I think the lawyers expected other professional groups to join. But Serbia is not a country with a strong tradition of strikes and especially of general strikes. So, this didn't hold. The lawyers had a one-month strike and now they're back at work.
Also farmers have been very dissatisfied with the way the agricultural policies have been carried out and implemented in all parts of Serbia. And we have had regular farmer protests about various issues and the farmers have been natural allies of the students. But I also have to say these farmers' associations are atomized. They are not united. Most of them are very engaged, but some of them are allies of the government. And there was some action by miners because there have also been some terrible mining accidents and tragedies also related to insufficient care and investment in mining facilities.
And I would say that these are all parts of society that have tremendous grievances. But somehow, we have not managed to come together. And I'm not sure that the students are the ones that can do it. On the other hand, because of this massive negative labeling of opposition parties, they are not seen as the ones who will do it. And it becomes very difficult to see how this will come together.
SR: Let’s turn to some civil society groups in Belgrade, where you yourself have been active. In the wake of the controversial parliamentary and Belgrade City Assembly elections at the end of 2023, you initiated with fellow intellectuals and academics a civic organization named ProGlas. Its main aims include the fight against oligarchy and the renewal of the democratic order, and of well-functioning legal, and political institutions in Serbia. You aim to build a society based on free, critical discussion and solidarity, and to establish transparency and accountability in political processes. Could you tell us a little more about your initiative in establishing ProGlas?
IP: We are an informal group of intellectuals. We have been trying to bring people together to the same table, to talk and to discuss. We've had these various panel discussions where we were bringing together members of the NGO sector, various local political parties. And generally speaking, I think there is the realization that this unification must come. But now it's very important that we overcome individual political ambitions. And this is where I say the genius of Mr. Djindjic is sorely missed. Because he was able to overcome these differences. At the moment, I think we are not there yet.
SR: Let me turn to another aspect which you just touched upon very briefly earlier, and that is the larger context. We’ll come to the geopolitical context in a moment but let me start with the immediate regional context. There's growing support for the protests in Serbia and neighboring countries, in Croatia and Bosnia,Slovenia, Macedonia. On the other hand, of course, there has been support for the regime from Viktor Orban in Hungary who recently signed a military treaty with Vucic and has even declared that they're waging a battle together against a common enemy. So how much support and strength can the movement now derive from the neighboring countries with whom there has been a complicated relationship since the breakup of Yugoslavia?
IP: Well, the student led protests in Serbia, I think, significantly contributed to the healing process. Since the end of the conflicts of the 90s and the very fragile democracies that have come out of these transitions, depending on the country, many politicians in the region have actually found it useful to maintain the ethnic animosities. It has served their purpose in maintaining power. And of course, the populations of all these countries in the Balkans are suffering because of it, and common people want to go past this. And the student protests have somehow had a unifying effect. These young people in Serbia, the students that are protesting they know of no other regime, but Mr. Vucic. They don't remember the conflicts of the 90s. They are maybe influenced by their parents and with certain prejudices. But they personally have not felt any animosity directly from other ethnicities. Other students in the region have really wholeheartedly supported the students.
There has been a lot of sympathy, in media in neighboring countries for what's going on here. I think also it's sort of a beacon because Serbia is not a member of the European Union. But in terms of the Balkans, Serbia is a larger country and, therefore, what happens in Serbia spills over and affects other countries. If nothing else, the atmosphere in the country is one of the most moving movements that we have had in Serbia. Because this tension toward ethnicities is not something that Mr. Vucic only radiates to the outside. It also goes inwards when it's convenient for him.
Novi Pazar is in the southern part of Serbia. It's a Muslim part of Serbia, and there is a university there. And there have been student protest mass rallies, where there has been a unification a joining together of Serbs and Muslims in their joint request for a normal Serbia. And these have been some of the most touching, most emotional images coming out of the protest where you have Serbian and Muslim students together under the Serbian flag. You know, this has not been seen in decades in this country. So, I think in that respect, the message of the future that the students carry is that they want rule of law and normal relations. Itcarries well to other countries. I think it's a sign of hope that it's possible to surpass these petty ethnic tensions that exist. The whole region is stuck in this situation where they cannot overcome the past and it's blocking the progress of all. I think it would be very well received, and, therefore, the students have done a great job
To what extent the local neighboring countries can really contribute other than supporting, I'm not sure. Mr. Orban, of course, is one of those who is not within this group of supporters, the mayor of Budapest has been. And when Belgrade students were cycling from Belgrade to Strasbourg, they stopped in Budapest, and they were greeted by the mayor of Budapest. So, I think that's a wonderful sign that not all people in Hungary are of the same opinion as Mr. Orban, just like in all countries with authoritarian regimes. The population does not necessarily think the same way as the ruler.
But, of course, the official line of Mr. Orban is to strongly support Mr. Vucic. The bullies, they stick together. And I think this is what is very disturbing. Mr. Vucic, likes Putin. He likes Lukashenko. He likes all of these “strongmen” politicians, and he's hoping to get support from them. And so far, he is getting it. Something that's quite amazing is that two days ago the patriarch of the Serbian Orthodox Church was in Moscow and he met with Mr. Putin. And he actually passed on the message to Mr. Putin that they are successfully fighting the “color revolution” in Serbia. That means he transmitted Mr. Vucic’s message. So, as you see it's a question of Serbia being a deeply divided society. But I think it's not divided 50-50 anymore. We have now a majority wanting one thing and a minority holding on for dear life to maintain its power and influence. So, I would say that this authoritarian tendency is something that can help Mr. Vucic only so much.
SR: I'd come to the European Union in a moment. I want to go back to the Russian case because I think there were two interesting points there. One that is not just a close relationship of one strong man to another, but the Russians have vital economic stakes, for example, in the Serbian oil industry, and we had a statement a few weeks ago by the Deputy Prime Minister of Serbia, openly thanking the Russian Special Forces and Intelligence Services for supporting them in their fight against what he called the counter revolution, by giving them information and other support. Despite this closeness to Russia, Mr. Vucic has managed to keep a balance by at least showing some deft, pragmatic support for Ukraine. Could that be one of the reasons that the European Union sees him not as just totally pro-Russian, but also as someone who is maintaining some kind of regional balance in the Balkans.
IP: Well, I think Mr. Vucic would like to see himself as a new Tito. He would really like to have the aura of the politician that can balance between east and west. But I think it's a very poor analogy. Mr. Vucic is not the caliber of Tito or the statesman that Tito was, but he would like to be. And so, in this balancing act, he is proclaiming that he wants to do what's in the best interest of Serbia. So, therefore, he's not pro-European; he's not pro-Russian.He's maintaining contacts with the European Union, Russia, Turkey, the Arab Emirates, with all partners where he could see some economic or political benefit. Of course, this benefit is mostly for himself personally and for his cronies. But he can sell this very well because as you know, the Yugoslav policy of non-alignment functioned very well in a different geopolitical context. But this is not the context that we have now.
So. Mr. Vucic is actually functioning in a transactional way, trying to give everyone a little bit of what they need and, in this way, to maintain his own power. As you know, Serbia has not introduced sanctions against Russia, but the Serbian arms industry is producing munitions for the Ukrainian army. And this is not a small commission. It's a very large contribution and it is significant. But on the other hand, Mr. Vucic's rhetoric that he's doing this is not because he's against the aggression that was done in Ukraine, but that Serbia is an independent country whose policy will not be influenced by others. This is his narrative, but of course this situation is not so simple.
Yes, the Russian oil industry has a vested interest in Serbia. The oil industry in Serbia is not large. There is some domestic oil, and at the moment, the majority stakeholder in the Serbian oil company is a Russian company. And, therefore, it is prone to U.S. sanctions. And at the moment there is a struggle going on where Mr. Vucic is trying to postpone the implementation of these sanctions. And so far, he's managed to do so. How long this chess game with the U.S. will be going on I don't know.Maybe this is being allowed because again Mr. Vucic has made certain concessions to the Trump family and their business interests, which will then maybe balance out in the end. It's difficult to say.
The Emirates have a lot of business interests in Serbia dealing with construction, agricultural land, businesses. So, he's trying to play the field to maintain his position. I don't think we're talking about ideological reasons in any case. We are talking simply about who will offer him the best conditions that he can maintain power.
SR: Yet President Vucic’s pro-Russian narrative seems to resonate well with many Serbian citizens. I find it quite surprising given the fact that historically the relationship between Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union was a rather fraught one to say the least.
IP: Of course, locally Mr. Vucic is playing on certain emotions of the population.One of these emotions is that the Russians and the Serbs share a common faith. This is the Orthodox Christian religion, but I also have to say, so do the Ukrainians. So, there are flaws in this logic and also developing a rather false picture. Thecenturies long traditional relationship between Russia and Serbia, the Soviet Union and Yugoslaviais, of course, not true.The Russian Empire or the Soviet Union as a very large entity, and Serbia as a small country are never equal partners. This is completely clear. And the relations between Yugoslavia and the Soviet Union were, let's put it mildly, strained, if not more than that.
So, I think Mr. Vucic is playing on the emotions of people who would like to believe in a common partnership with Russia, which isn't really there. It also helps somehow to maintain this national pride. Which is not irrelevant as you know, when a country is becoming poor and in any other way losing out and then you bring out the national feelings and how important they are. You have the whole classic book of how politics are run by autocratic leaders, not to say dictators. And he's using all of the elements in this book. So, maybe I've taken too long to explain all of these things, but I think it's very important to say that there is no clear national strategy or ideology. We are talking about a man who is in a transactional relationship with all of those who will help him stay in power. And that is the bottom line.
SR: Chinese question is an interesting one, particularly because the tipping point in a sense, the beginning of this particular wave of protest was the roof collapse of the Novi Sad railway station that was part of a large Chinese infrastructural investment.
Obviously Chinese government doesn't care much about domestic politics in the countries in which it's doing business as long as its economic interests are not threatened. Could you say something about how the Chinese presence is playing out in this context, or is it irrelevant?
IP: No, I wouldn't say it's irrelevant. Maybe the political aspect would not be key. I would say the economic one is key because in Eastern Serbia, China has a vested interest in the copper mines. And the second point is that Serbia is heavily indebted. Serbia is getting unfavorable Chinese loans to build highways and other infrastructure such as the railroad station. So, these are loans not under good conditions. I'm not a finance expert, so I cannot say how unfavorable, but there is always the key aspect that Chinese companies need to be engaged in carrying out these jobs and these projects.
Serbia has become an indentured servant to China because there is not ever a problem to get a Chinese loan. I don't know how many generations it will take for us to pay back. Therefore, China doesn't have to exert any political influence. It just needs to pull the string of, you know, when will you pay back the loan? And if you don't, then you must do this, this, and this. I think it's an expectation. And this is also a foothold for Chinese companies and interests going into Europe. The Chinese play the long game. And I think they're doing it very well, unfortunately. And I think it's not in the best interest of Serbia. I'm not saying that Serbia should not have interactions with China. Serbia should have a partnership with all companies or nations that will provide fair and equal opportunities. It has to be a two-way street. And the way it is now, I think this partnership with China is only beneficial for the Chinese.
SR: Let me come to my last question, and that is the European Union. We've touched on it briefly and you've touched several times on the Serbian lithium mine which has strategic importance for the European Union's Green Deal and also for the German industry. Now, on the one hand, I think the response of the European Union has been rather disappointing. To begin with, it had criticized the Vucic regime, including for alleged electoral fraud. But of late, it then started to adopt a pragmatic transactional stance towards Serbia. Do you think that one of the reasons that the students or even other citizensaredisappointed, and have reservations about the EU isalsothe protracted accession procedure to which Serbia has been subjected to with no end in sight? What role do you think European Union could play in shaping the future trajectory of Serbian politics?
IP: Well, I think the role of the European Union was very significant.The European Union could have played an enormous role. But I will go back a little bit in time. As you remember, at one point there was a stop in the accession process when Albania and North Macedonia were on the verge of becoming candidate countries. So, even though it did not directly affect Serbia, it left a very bad impression. All of the things that people in the Western Balkans are told about the fair process, you need to fulfill the conditions, and if you fulfill the conditions, you'll join the European Union.
And I don't know enough about Albania, but North Macedonia was one of the countries that, since its transition, was most compliant to do everything that the European Union requested in this transition process. Of course, at the rate at which it was possible. We have to say it's never easy to do this, but they did it. And when you saw someone who's being so open to partnering and cooperating, being stopped in such an abrupt way then the talk of the politicians isaccepted by the people that no matter what Serbia does, we will never join the EU because there will always be new and new conditions.
And of course, there are no new conditions. They're always the same conditions, but the government represents it as if there are new conditions continuously being put upon Serbia and the people believe it. And now with the beginning of the protest, when you see Mr. Vucic smiling and shaking hands with Mrs. Von der Leyen, it leaves a bad impression. On the other hand, I know that Macron was coming to Serbia end of April. I think Kaja Kallas will be coming at the end of May. So, there is some diplomatic political activity going on between Serbia and the European Union. We are also hearing sort of very discreet comments from Mrs. Von der Leyen that European values are the same as the student values.
What we are seeing in the news lately is that maybe there's been a slight shift and that the European Union is realizing that this struggle for democratic values that the protestors are insisting on are also the values of the European Union. So, therefore, it would not be in the best interest of the European Union to stand exclusively supporting Mr. Vucic. So, I think we're seeing some changes there.
So maybe there's a slight shift, but we don't really see a very open support of the change that is occurring in Serbia. And I think this can be very easily explained. The European Union, of course, is a very complex, bureaucratic political system, and they want a partner that they can talk to.
And I think now during these protests, as there is no visible face of the protest, they might have qualms about who is their partner, who are they talking to, and because they don't see it yet, they are very hesitant about what to do, so maybe they will give some discreet comments that are supporting the need for democratization.
They will imply that Mr. Vucic needs to work on opening up the media and improving the conditions for voting, but I don't think they will do anything more than that because they simply won't give up a trusted partner to an unknown. This is where we are at the moment. This could change, of course. Everything is very dynamic at the moment and changing.
SR: Ivanka, you've described President Vucic’s strategies and the status quo. You've also analyzed the dilemmas of the European Union that have now perhaps begun to shift its position ever so slightly. What is the perception of the European Union among Serbian citizens and what would you wish the European Union to do next?
IP: This lukewarm response by Europe is making it difficult for even those who are the staunchest supporters of Europe to keep supporting Europe. For a number of years, the support for the European Union and entering the Union was maybe at 50-50. Now it's gone below that number. And so, a minority of people in Serbia now see the benefit of joining the European Union which of course is not the correct response because let's face it, Serbia is surrounded by European Union countries, by NATO countries. It's completely normal that we have a functioning relationship with the European Union and that we need to work on it. But on the other hand, I think when you want to join a larger entity you want to feel that you are a desired future member of this entity. And at the moment, I don't think anyone is feeling that. And I think it's up to Europe to decide what is strategically important for Europe. I think it would be very useful for Europe to finally make the step and not be reluctant as it has been over the past decades, and to assert its presence in the Western Balkans.
But of course, you know, I'm not a politician and I presume the European Union at the moment is faced with other challenges where simply the situation in Serbia doesn't seem to be important enough. But I think in the long run, if the concept of Europe is based on values, then if this is truly the case, then Serbia should be a top priority for Europe, in my opinion.
SR: Thank you ever so much, Ivanka, for this really incisive and detailed discussion of the historical trajectory of student protests in Serbia and the current developments, which seem to be at a delicate stage. You've also situated them well into the larger regional and the geopolitical context, which is a complicated one to say the least.
I can only wish you the very best for the coming period, which will be decisive for the turn that Serbia takes towards democratization. Thank you very, very much.
IP: Thank you for having me.
SR: Picking up on where we left off two weeks ago, Ivanka explained why Serbian students are so deeply suspicious of the entire political establishment, including all political parties in the opposition.
She spoke of the fragmented and demoralized parliamentary opposition, which raises strategic dilemmas for the future direction of the protests. While the student protests have precedence’s and parallels in previous mobilizations against the Vucic regime and even earlier from rallying against electoral irregularities to eco-political campaigns against controversial mining projects, it has by now become amply clear that many young people have grown disillusioned with conventional politics altogether.
Ivanka explained president Vucic’s rise to power by riding on the wave of popular discontent with the previousgovernment. And she also pointed to his use thereafter of the well-known toolkit of many soft authoritarian leaders to successfully consolidate his and his parties rule. The success of the student protest has restored to the Serbian people its faith in making their voices heard, but the success of their challenge to the regime will clearly depend on broader alliances with other groups and networks of solidarity, including with political parties, activists, and civil organizations as well. However, if there is a chance to defeat the ruling party in an election soon, rules will have to be urgently revised to ensure free elections.
An unexpected, but promising effect of the protests is the strong regional support the students have received from ethnic minorities in Serbia, as well as from students and media in neighboring countries, many of which share a history of hostility and distrust due to the bloody breakup of Yugoslavia less than three decades ago.
The students represent the first generation that did not experience firsthand the trauma of the Balkan conflicts in the 1990s. They have thus catalyzed long overdue process of interethnic dialogue and reconciliation, giving new hope to the wider region as well. The current geopolitical context, however, may favor the transactional logic of aspiring and would be autocrats such as president Vucic, but he could definitely navigate renewed tensions among power blocks by privatizing and selling out the economic assets of the nation, even as he continues to spin ultra nationalist narratives.
Ivanka warned that the European Union should refrain from participating in this charade, and instead it should take a firm principle stand vis-a-vis what is going on in Serbia. If the EU only pursues its narrow economic interest in realpolitik by giving up standing for its declared democratic values, it risks alienating pro-European Serbians.
For these constituencies, Europe is not merely an abstract ideal, but accession to the EU would be a possible end to their ongoing courageous struggle for democratization. I can only hope that my guest’s words of caution and her passionate plea will be heated across Europe and that Serbian students could be a model for resistance to soft authoritarian rule worldwide, which is violating university autonomy everywhere.
This was the seventh episode of Season 10 of Democracy in Question. Thank you very much for listening. Join me again in a fortnight when my guest will be Samuel Bagg, a political theorist at the University of South Carolina. We'll discuss his highly acclaimed book titled “The Dispersion of Power. Critical Realist Theory of Democracy”.
Please go back and listen to any episode you might have missed, and of course, let your friends know about the podcast, if you're enjoying it, you can stay in touch with the work of the Central European University at www.ceu.edu and the Albert Hirschman Center on democracy at www.graduateinstitute.ch/democracy.