Does EU criticism have any effect on Serbia?

Violation of the rule of law, democracy, freedom of speech and media, corruption, pressure on courts and prosecutors' offices - these are the problems that stand out.

4448 views 4 comment(s)

Photo: EPA

Disclaimer: The translations are mostly done through AI translator and might not be 100% accurate.

10.11.2025. 21:46h

One visit, two resolutions and one "redistribution of Swedish financial resources" - four slaps to Serbia from the European Union in just one month.

First, Ursula von der Leyen, President of the European Commission, brought the message of "actions, not just words" to Belgrade and reiterated what is expected of Serbia on its path to the EU, which has long looked like Belgrade's Slavia during morning rush hour.

It's noisy, but mostly everything is fine.

This was followed by a resolution of the European Parliament, considered one of the harshest to date, and a recent resolution of the European Commission was also passed in the same tone.

Finally, Sweden, one of the largest foreign donors in Serbia, announced a partial suspension of aid to state authorities and redirecting money to the civilian sector.

Similar problems were highlighted in all four places - violations of the rule of law, democracy, freedom of speech and media, corruption, pressure on courts and prosecutors' offices.

Do EU criticisms have any practical influence or effect on official Belgrade?

They could if Brussels and key European capitals link access to EU money and markets, as well as various political meetings, to reforms, according to Veronica Angel, a professor at the European University Institute in Florence.

"If Germany, France, Italy and others follow the European Commission's message and it is unified, the pressure would be great, even though there is no direct control over what the authorities in Belgrade will do domestically," Angel tells BBC Serbian.

The situation was further complicated by the collapse of a canopy in Novi Sad, which killed 16 people, causing anti-government protests across the country, with which the demonstrators are demanding that responsibility for the Novi Sad tragedy be determined.

Serbia will meet all criteria for EU entry by the end of 2026, Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić previously stated, although it has not done so in more than a decade.

Many of the EU's criticisms represent a "knock on an open door", because these days we are bringing important and complex reform processes to a close, Nemanja Starović, Serbia's Minister for European Integration, tells BBC Serbian.

The two key stumbling blocks in Serbia's accession negotiations have been the same for years - the unresolved status of Kosovo and the failure to harmonize foreign policy with that of Europe, which in practice means the demand to impose sanctions on Russia over the war in Ukraine.

Regarding sanctions against Russia, changes are possible "if the Serbian Government so decides", he said recently Vučić, who in the meantime received from official Moscow.

Mirror

The resolution of the European Commission, a kind of EU government, brought some rather harsh words.

It notes a deepening division in society due to student protests, called "an expression of disappointment over corruption, lack of accountability and transparency."

While protesters of corruption - according to which Serbia is the third country in Europe - see it as the main cause of the collapse of the newly renovated railway station canopy, the authorities deny this.

As many times before, they repeat "let the institutions do their job", even though one can hear from the streets that they are under the control of the ruling Serbian Progressive Party.

Which the authorities also deny.

While the protests continue, the European Commission specifically points to "excessive use of force against demonstrators", but also pressures on civil society and the media, as well as "attempts to politically influence the judiciary".

The report also mentions the "nexus between crime and politics."

"All the criticisms of different institutions are nicely summarized in that report, although the European Commission is often seen as a technocratic institution, expressing itself in diplomatic vocabulary," Strahinja Subotić from the Center for European Policies tells BBC Serbian.

"However, they have now said in black and white many things that would have been wrapped in wafers before."

He sees the key accusation as being that "all decisions are made against one person" - President Vučić - which should not be the case in a democratic country and potential EU member, he adds.

Presenting the European Commission's report, the European Union Ambassador to Serbia, Andreas von Beckerath, called it a "mirror", which Vučić didn't really like.

"You said it was a mirror, but I would say it was your opinion," He said.

Nemanja Starović, Minister for European Integration in the Serbian Government, believes that the EC report "is certainly not the worst so far, neither in a formal sense nor in substance."

Although it contains strong criticisms, the level of progress in none of the 33 chapters was rated as regression, which is the lowest rating on the six-point scale of progress, he points out.

"The annual report represents a comprehensive inventory of everything we have done in the previous year and lists all the reforms that we have not completed," Starović said in a written response to the BBC in Serbian.

He emphasizes that the adoption of amendments to the Law on the Unified Voters' Register and the election of members of the Council of the Regulatory Body for Electronic Media (REM) is close.

He also claims that "intensive work is being done on a whole package of laws and bylaws in the field of the rule of law, the fight against crime and corruption."

"I am confident that by the end of this year, very soon, we will have good and tangible results," says Starović, a senior official of the ruling SNS.

Influence

There are three ways in which criticism from the European Parliament (EP) and the European Commission (EC) could have an effect on Serbia, Angel believes.

Growth plan

Firstly, through the EU growth plan, through which candidate countries are paid money depending on progress in the so-called most fundamental – the rule of law, media freedom, elections and political dialogue, he states.

A negative annual report could mean a harder or smaller payout.

"It changes someone's behavior faster than regular speeches," emphasizes Angel, who works on international politics and European integration.

He sees the Swedish redistribution of donations as "one of the models" of such influence and "a signal to Belgrade that who will receive European money depends on the government's behavior."

"This is not directly caused by the EP and EC resolutions, but it is on the same track, so we see some coordination there," Angel believes.

"We can expect others to take similar steps if there is no progress in Serbia."

Clusters

Then, negative findings in the reports slow down the opening or closing of clusters - sets of negotiation chapters - so that even easier chapters are blocked until there is progress, he adds.

Serbia has so far opened 22 out of 35 chapters, two of which are temporarily closed - Chapter 25 (science and research) and Chapter 26 (education and culture).

Cluster 1 (Fundamentals) and Cluster 4 (Green Agenda and Sustainable Connectivity) have been opened.

Chapter 35, which deals with relations with Pristina, is a particular problem.

"We are the only candidate country from the Western Balkans that is challenged in terms of its own territorial integrity, and this naturally makes our progress in the accession process significantly more difficult," Minister Starović tells the BBC.

And then there is the case of (non)alignment with the EU's foreign and security policy.

The compliance rate was raised from 51 percent to 66 percent in the previous year, without joining economic sanctions against Russia, Starović added, which he calls "great progress."

The political price of silence

"Ultimately, the resolutions increase the political cost for member states if they decide to turn a blind eye to what Serbia is doing while simultaneously demanding concessions on Kosovo and energy," Angel believes.

For some time now, and especially since the beginning of mass protests over the collapse of the canopy, the camp of anti-government protesters has been accusing the European Union and its member states of not reacting sufficiently to everything that is happening in Serbia.

The most common is that the EU is more interested in maintaining the status quo and "stabilocracy" than in doing anything about the undermining of democratic values and institutions.

And indeed, the protests were accompanied by mostly diplomatically brief statements from Brussels.

The situation was slightly changed by Marta Kos, the EU Commissioner for Enlargement, who wrote on the anniversary of the tragedy that the protesters were "fighting for responsibility, freedom of expression and inclusive democracy, the values that lead Serbia into the EU."

Negotiations

Ultimately, most simply, but also in the long term, EU membership itself depends on reports from its institutions - although that is a fairly long shot.

The European Union members are the ones who decide on the future of Serbia, and they rely on the European Commission's report, says Subotić.

"If on the one hand we argue with them, and on the other hand we say that we are pro-European, that approach will not lead us to membership," he adds.

Meanwhile, Montenegro and Albania are progressing and have the status of the best EU students.

They could join the EU in a few years.

"We will find ourselves in a situation where we are left alone in the region, without membership, with solid borders with Montenegro," says Subotić.

Instead of the Open Balkans, a cooperation project between Serbia, Albania and North Macedonia, official Belgrade will get the "Closed Balkans", he adds.

Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, YouTube i Viber. If you have a topic suggestion for us, please contact bbcnasrpskom@bbc.co.uk

Bonus video: