Your Hands Are Also Bloody

Protestors gather at Trg Slavija, Belgrade, following the canopy collapse at the Novi Sad train station. Photo courtesy of Stefan Miljuš.

“Kako, bre, da uhapsite čoveka koji nije prekršio zakon?” (How can you arrest a man who did not break the law?) were the words of Serbian president Aleksandar Vučić during a media conference in defense of a driver who intentionally struck a protester during a demonstration in Požarevac. He added, “You stood in someone’s way…and then demanded that we arrest him, simply because he was operating his vehicle. Are you all sane? In which other country does this happen?” In typical populist fashion, Vučić often employs this kind of rhetoric to dismiss legitimate political concerns, characterizing them as both outlandish and idiotic. Yet, what’s just as appalling is the response of the European Union’s so-called democratic powerhouses to this behavior. Despite explicit and continuous support for pro-democracy protests in Georgia and Ukraine’s armed resistance against Russian aggression, the EU has failed to condemn the ongoing political crisis in Serbia. The selectiveness raises the question: What democratic movements does the EU consider as legitimate?

The current protests in Serbia come after nearly five years of deteriorating rights and liberties under Vučić’s leadership. According to Freedom House, an American think tank, “attacks on journalists and tightening the control of the media environment have been among the most prominent features of [democratic] erosion.” Despite efforts to extinguish opposition, the Serbian people have been relentless in fighting back, with over 80 percent of the population expressing approval for the anti-government demonstrations and 60 percent being involved in some way. These demonstrations call attention to democratic backsliding, government corruption, rule of law violations, and state-sanctioned violence against protestors and political opposition. However, the most recent wave of protests, beginning in 2024, has been different in its power and appeal. 

On November 1, 2024, in the northern city of Novi Sad, a concrete canopy hanging above the central train station collapsed, killing 14 people. Grief and outrage engulfed the city, many believing this tragedy to be the fault of government negligence and corruption. Hundreds of thousands of people of different ages, backgrounds, and political affiliations rallied under the slogan “Ruke su vam krvave” (Your hands are bloody) across the nation in protest. Underscoring the scale of the movement, on March 8, 2025, a demonstration in Belgrade’s Republic Square garnered the support of over 300,000 people—making it the largest protest in Serbian history. Demonstrators demanded accountability for the canopy collapse, adherence to the rule of law, truth and transparency in media representation and government affairs, and for institutions to serve their intended purpose. Though similar in values, what distinguishes the anti-government protests in Serbia from those in nations like Hungary, Georgia, and Slovakia is the notable lack of EU flags and paraphernalia. Political scientist Branislav Radeljic believes that this is no surprise. Although the protestors are calling for changes that align with the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, EU inaction in the eyes of the demonstrators is a sign of both abandonment and hypocrisy.

 Beyond Serbia, the EU has demonstrated its ability to advocate for liberal democratic movements, both at home and abroad. Although the EU has received criticism for not doing enough in the face of democratic backsliding in Hungary and Poland, the bloc retaliated to illiberal policies and growing restrictions on press freedom by revoking funding and threatening the suspension of voting rights. In response to the ongoing protests in Georgia, the EU was quick to condemn the Georgian government and provide verbal support for the demonstrators. The European External Action Service, the diplomatic service of the EU, even demanded “an end to widespread intimidation, political persecution, reported torture and ill-treatment of citizens” from the Georgian government. The EU was also quick to extend a hand of solidarity to Ukraine following Russia’s invasion, welcoming millions of Ukrainian refugees, imposing sanctions on Russia, and supplying the nation with funding and arms, despite having to shoulder massive economic and social burdens in order to do so. However, the EU has failed time and time again to provide this same support for the Serbian people. As articulated by Slovenian Member of the European Parliament Vladimir Prebilič, EU leaders “keep doing business as usual with Vučić as if nothing happened, ignoring hundreds of thousands of Serbs on the streets.” Rather, Serbia’s anti-government protests pose a direct threat to the EU’s political and economic interests.

Serbia occupies a unique position within Europe. Following Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, it was the only European nation aside from Belarus that refused to sanction and instead continued to maintain friendly relations with Russia. Moreover, since Vučić came to power, Serbia has increasingly aligned itself with China, receiving substantial investments and mutual support on key international issues such as China's refusal to recognize Kosovo and Serbia's backing of the Belt and Road initiative. China even views Serbia as a gateway to accessing the greater European market and expanding its influence on the continent. On the other hand, Serbia remains an EU candidate country and has received almost 3 billion euros in financial support from the bloc since 2001. Thanks to Vučić’s aggressive investment initiatives, many European corporations have factories in Serbia, where they have access to cheap, skilled labor and minimal regulations. In addition, Serbia possesses the largest natural lithium reserves in Europe, a resource that has become even more coveted as Europe seeks to reinvigorate its stagnating economy and limit its dependence on foreign energy sources. Despite mass public opposition and evidence that lithium mining in the region would result in the contamination of water sources for 2.5 million people, EU President Ursula Von der Leyen and French President Emanuel Macron insist on working with Vučić to push the project forward. This reflects a troubling willingness by both the EU and the Serbian regime to sideline democratic principles, environmental concerns, and human rights in pursuit of economic and political gain.

The EU perceives that its profits are tied to Serbia’s descent into authoritarianism because they understand that initiatives such as the lithium extraction project would not manifest without him. As a result, the bloc continues to tiptoe around Vučić out of fear that if they were to ostracize him, he would leap into the embrace of Russia and China. Although deeper integration into European institutions is in Serbia’s best interest, Vučić has done little to advance EU membership, as it would require relinquishing significant political control and enacting substantial democratic reforms.

The EU is already a decade too late in addressing Serbia’s eroding democracy. However, by prioritizing profit over accountability, they are complicit in constraining both their own credibility and the well-being of the Serbian people. Each year, 50,000 Serbs leave the country because of political instability, low quality of life, and lack of opportunity and economic mobility. In the meantime, Vučić clings to this “middle-of-the-road” position between the EU, Russia, and China to maintain power, watching his nation crumble underneath him. 

To say the EU’s hands are tied is both false and dangerous. Internally, the EU is already experiencing threats to its own liberal democratic order, with far-right populist movements gaining traction in many countries. In ignoring the Serbian opposition’s concerns and failing to pressure or even condemn Vučić, the EU is effectively enabling his actions, risking further destabilization in the Western Balkans. Vučić recently confirmed that he would be attending Russia’s Victory Day Parade, despite warnings that it would result in the end of Serbia’s EU accession path. Here, we observe how the EU’s appeasement strategy is ineffective in securing Vučić’s loyalty to the bloc. Complacency has marked a shift away from the EU not only on a political level, but rather, it has eroded the EU’s credibility on a social level within Serbia as well. In January of 2025, a collection of advocacy and civil society organizations sent a letter to Brussels, highlighting their frustration with the EU’s lack of response or acknowledgement of Serbia’s deteriorating political situation despite the fact that the European Commission has published documents in the past that demonstrate its knowledge of it. This hypocrisy is in part the root of growing Euroscepticism in Serbia, with figures plummeting from 70% of the population holding favorable views of EU accession in 2006 to just 40% before the onset of the protests in 2024, and that figure continues to fall as the EU fails to act. 

During a time of growing authoritarianism, attacks on speech, and press censorship, democratic solidarity is growing increasingly important. The EU’s complicity in the erosion of Serbia’s institutions demonstrates how profit dictates their actions more so than the democratic values EU leaders hold dear. In the face of the declining liberal order, the EU’s complacency leaves its hands just as bloody as those of the authoritarian leaders it supports.

Hana Arnautovic (CC ‘27) is a staff writer from Detroit, Michigan. She studies economics and political science and is interested in democratic backsliding, international courts and tribunals, IGO’s, and Western Balkan and EU politics. She can be reached at ha2705@columbia.edu.