In recent weeks, Serbia has found itself at the center of a political storm, with streets across the country echoing protests led by students and others voicing widespread grievances. The unrest has become an unprecedented challenge to the decade-long dominance of President Aleksandar Vucic, a political figure with a reputation for deftly navigating Serbia’s polarized politics and walking a tightrope between Russia and the West. This tumultuous chapter in Serbia’s political saga reached a major turning point when President Vucic sacrificed one of his closest allies, Prime Minister Milos Vucevic, in an attempt to quell the protests.
—
The catalyst for these fiery demonstrations was a tragic and preventable incident in Novi Sad, a major northern city. On November 1, 15 people lost their lives when a concrete canopy over the newly renovated Novi Sad railway station collapsed, crushing innocent commuters. The renovation project had been conducted by a Chinese company and its subcontractors. As the dust settled over the literal and figurative devastation, questions about accountability, corruption, and negligence arose, sparking simmering anger across the nation.
What began as a single issue—the demand for accountability for those responsible for the construction failure—quickly became something far larger. Students, angered at the loss of lives and the pervasive corruption that they believe enabled the tragedy, took to the streets. They occupied campuses, staged sit-ins, and organized protest marches. In Novi Sad, graffiti scrawled on the headquarters of the ruling Serbian Progressive Party read damning accusations like “Murderers” and “Thieves.” Tempers flared further after unidentified pro-government supporters beat protesters, adding one more layer of volatility to an already volatile situation.
Enter President Vucic, a leader infamous for his political cunning. With rising tensions threatening his grip on power, he sought to defuse the situation by meeting some of the students’ demands. He vowed to release contracts and documents related to the railway station’s reconstruction. Already, some responsible officials had been prosecuted, and key government ministers were dismissed. But as the protests grew, fueled by a deeper frustration with government corruption and authoritarian tendencies, these measures were increasingly viewed as too little, too late.
The president’s next move was shocking but predictable, given his political history. On Tuesday, Prime Minister Milos Vucevic announced his resignation, citing a need “not to further raise tensions in society.” It was a dramatic twist, but not one entirely out of character for Vucic, a politician known for sacrificing allies to protect himself and keep opponents off balance. This sacrifice, however, may not have the calming effect Vucic hopes for. Dragomir Andelovic, a student-sympathizing political analyst, dismissed the move as “a new fraud” and predicted continued unrest. Others suspect that this is merely an attempt by Vucic to buy more time, perhaps hoping the protests will naturally lose momentum.
—
These protests represent more than just anger over infrastructure failings—they are a culmination of years of grievances against Vucic’s administration, viewed by many as increasingly autocratic. Since taking office as President in 2017—following a previous stint as Prime Minister—Vucic has turned what was once a largely ceremonial role into the nerve center of Serbian politics. His outsized control has drawn the ire of a diverse array of critics, from opposition parties to wider swaths of civil society.
The current protests stand apart from previous anti-government movements in Serbia’s recent history. Whereas earlier movements, such as those against COVID-19 restrictions or a large lithium mine project, were largely confined to Belgrade and fizzled out over time, today’s unrest spans the entire country. The Novi Sad canopy collapse, and its alleged link to corrupt deals, became a flashpoint for frustrations with broader issues—corruption, high-handed governance, lack of accountability, and the dominance of pro-government media outlets.
In Novi Sad, Nis, Belgrade, and beyond, tens of thousands of protesters have taken to the streets. The scope of participation surpasses traditional activist circles and opposition party lines. Notably, unexpected allies like trade unions representing state-run media employees and even Serbian tennis icon Novak Djokovic have lent their voices, or at least their sympathy, to the protesters. The spectacle of Serbian veterans waving Russian flags at protests has raised questions about external influences and attempts to deepen instability.
—
Speaking of external forces, Serbia’s complex geopolitical position plays a shadowy but critical role in the current turmoil. Traditionally allied with Russia but flirting with Western partnerships, Serbia’s uncertain direction has kept international players watching intently. The United States, under the Biden administration, sought to pry Vucic away from Moscow’s embrace by fostering economic ties and diplomacy. This approach has yielded mixed results. Serbia clandestinely supplied Ukraine with nearly a billion dollars in arms for its fight against Russia but refused to impose sanctions on Moscow. Additionally, Serbia supported United Nations resolutions condemning Russia’s invasion, signaling a partial alignment with Western ideals.
However, Vucic’s government has also mirrored Kremlin-style rhetoric domestically. The president has labeled the protests as a “color revolution” staged by “foreign instructors” and “agents” from the West. In line with this narrative, the government recently deported Croatian activists accused of aiding Serbian protesters. The influence of Russia is a constant backdrop, with some analysts suggesting Moscow is exploiting the chaos to push Serbia further away from Western influence.
Meanwhile, Serbia remains locked in a complex path toward European Union membership, having applied back in 2009. Doubts about Serbia’s democracy, its alignment with Russia, and ongoing corruption scandals have served as persistent obstacles to EU integration—a goal that many citizens feel is growing increasingly elusive under Vucic’s leadership.
—
The protests’ size and intensity have drawn comparisons to the late 1990s unrest that eventually toppled Slobodan Milosevic, another autocrat who led Serbia into disastrous wars during Yugoslavia’s breakup. Although the situations differ in some ways, the historical echoes are unmistakable, underscoring the seriousness of today’s crisis. Traffic in major cities has come to a standstill thanks to protest marches, and businesses have been disrupted. The sustained nature of these demonstrations has shaken the very foundation of Vucic’s administration.
At stake is more than just the political career of Aleksandar Vucic. The protests have morphed into a broader reckoning over the future of Serbia—how decisions are made, whose interests are prioritized, and what kind of country it wants to be. Whether the removal of the prime minister will be seen as enough of a course correction by the protesters remains uncertain. But judging by the prevailing mood, it seems that the citizens of Serbia are demanding systemic change, not just cosmetic reshuffles.
From students at the forefront to trade unions, celebrities, and even veterans, a diverse coalition of voices has come together in defiance of a political system they see as broken. President Vucic finds himself walking an increasingly narrow path, trying to placate an emboldened public while preserving his political dominance. The question that looms now is whether the protests will fizzle out, as they’ve done in the past, or whether this moment will become a genuine turning point for Serbia. Either way, the nation teeters at a crossroads, and the world is watching.
