The protests that have shaken both nations since late 2024 are notable for their parallels, occurring as political factions aligned with Russia gain momentum across the globe.
Two nationalist leaders from Central Europe, known for their pro-Russian ties, are currently confronting significant protests. They liken these demonstrations to “color revolutions” or a new “Maidan,” referencing the pro-European uprisings that took place in Kyiv during the winter of 2013-2014. The protests currently unfolding in Serbia and Slovakia reveal notable parallels, occurring as political factions aligned with the Kremlin are making headway across various regions, all amidst a climate of war fatigue in Ukraine.
For weeks, tens of thousands of sociologically similar individuals from Serbia and Slovakia, particularly younger, educated urbanites, have been demonstrating in their respective countries. Critics point fingers at Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic and Slovak Prime Minister Robert Fico for employing similar tactics: embracing authoritarianism and corruption reminiscent of regimes that emulate Russia, including Viktor Orban’s Hungary, which they both seem to hold in high regard.
Clearly, the circumstances in Belgrade and Bratislava are not entirely alike. In Slovakia, which has been a member of the European Union since 2004, the movement began with Mr. Fico’s controversial visit to Vladimir Putin in December 2024. “Slovakia is distinct from Moscow.” “Slovakia is Europe,” the demonstrators declare, waving European flags in defiance of their leader, who narrowly avoided imprisonment for corruption during his time in opposition and has since been undermining the independence of the judiciary, law enforcement, and the media since regaining power in 2023.
In Serbia, a nation currently aspiring for EU membership, students rallied in the streets following the tragic death of fifteen individuals due to the collapse of the Novi Sad train station awning on 1 November 2024. Their initial call is for “justice”, as they perceive this incident as a direct result of the pervasive corruption and the prevailing sense of impunity surrounding Mr. Vucic’s circle. The individual has maintained authority for over a decade, simultaneously asserting dominance over the judicial system and a significant portion of the media landscape within his nation.
In the face of various criticisms, the EU continues to stand as a symbol for Europeans aspiring to reside in a genuinely democratic nation. Nonetheless, although Central Europe is not experiencing the same level of conflict as Ukraine, it has undeniably emerged as a battleground for the contrasting values of Russia and the EU. On one side, there are authoritarian and corrupt regimes exhibiting far-right inclinations. Conversely, there are civil societies that aspire to genuine democracy, characterized by an independent justice system capable of investigating all individuals without bias.
In this confrontation, the EU stands solitary on the front line. In late January, the decision to suspend all American funds intended for supporting democratization efforts signaled a clear shift in the United States’ stance, suggesting a diminished commitment to addressing democratic backsliding in Central Europe. Predictably, this decision was met with enthusiasm by the officials in Belgrade, Bratislava, and Budapest, where Kremlin-affiliated commentators have swiftly crafted their conspiracy narrative, asserting that the protests in Serbia and Slovakia are now funded not by the CIA, but rather “by Ukraine.”
At this point, the EU, fraught with internal divisions and mired in diplomatic formalities, has regrettably failed to convey that it is prepared to assume responsibility. The European Commission services, having failed to take timely action in Hungary where Viktor Orban consolidated power before sanctions were applied, continue to favor negotiating compromises with Robert Fico instead of initiating sanction procedures. On 5 February, the European Commissioner for Enlargement, Marta Kos, released a statement addressing the “violence” in Serbia and urging for assurances of “freedom of assembly.” However, she refrained from directly identifying the root of the issue, specifically the governance of Mr. Vucic.
The EU finds itself in a precarious situation, with both leaders having been elected in elections recognized as legitimate, largely due to an older voting demographic. The European Union grapples with the duplicity exhibited by certain member states. In July 2024, German Chancellor Olaf Scholz visited Belgrade to advocate for the establishment of a crucial lithium mine to support the automobile sector, all while failing to voice any criticism regarding Mr. Vucic’s excesses. Just like Emmanuel Macron, who visited in August to promote the sale of twelve Rafale aircraft to Serbia.
A concerning outcome: Serbian youth perceive that Europe is, in fact, backing Mr. Vucic. Clearly, there is no straightforward answer to navigate this predicament. However, the EU should overcome its fear of its own influence when its principles are disregarded by governments both within and near its borders. While they often criticize the West as “perverted,” the leaders of these nations are acutely aware of the benefits that the EU offers. The evidence is clear: they all assert their desire to be involved.
+ There are no comments
Add yours