Search

Begin New Search Topic Foreign Policy Political Geography Serbia

11. Overcoming EU internal dividing lines in the Belgrade-Pristina dialogue

Author:
Wouter Zweers
Publication Date:
04-2022
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Clingendael Netherlands Institute of International Relations
Abstract:
Last year saw the 10th anniversary of the EU-facilitated Belgrade-Pristina dialogue. While leading to results on technical matters, political normalisation of the relationship between Serbia and Kosovo has not been achieved. As part of a broader study on EU foreign policy effectiveness, this policy brief discusses the ways in which EU internal factors have hampered the EU’s effectiveness in the Belgrade-Pristina dialogue. Specifically, the paper assesses the positions and influence of EU member states vis-à-vis one another and the European institutions, asking how contradictions could be overcome in the future. This assessment is placed in the wider context in which the dialogue takes place, taking into account the state of EU enlargement and foreign power influence.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, European Union, Institutions, Normalization, and Dialogue
Political Geography:
Eastern Europe, Kosovo, and Serbia

12. Beyond Sputnik and RT: How Does Russian Soft Power in Serbia Really Work?

Author:
Vuk Vuksanović
Publication Date:
12-2022
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Belgrade Centre for Security Policy (BCSP)
Abstract:
Public opinion in Serbia and Russian soft power are some of the topics of the BCSP analysis written by BCSP Senior Researcher Vuk Vuksanović, President of the International Advisory Committee Srđan Cvijić and BCSP Visiting Fellow Maksim Samorukov. In 2022, as part of the public opinion survey, the Open Society Foundation (OSF) and Datapraxis collected data from 22 countries for the purpose of the report entitled “Fault Lines: Global Perspectives on a World in Crisis”. The Belgrade Centre for Security Policy (BCSP) had exclusive access to the said report and was able to analyse it. In autumn 2022, BCSP conducted its own public opinion survey on the Serbian citizens’ perception of the country’s major foreign and security policy issues. The “Fault Lines” survey established that Serbia is much different than any other country involved in the survey, including those that generally subscribe to the Russian narrative concerning the Russia-Ukraine war. The BCSP survey applied an even more granular approach to how Russian popularity in Serbia is manifested and how deeply it is entrenched. Based on the research findings, it can be concluded that soft power is a major element of the Russian presence in Serbia. However, the catch is that Russia’s soft power in Serbia is not operating based on the traditional definition of the term, derived from the attractiveness of a political and social model, but rather on the fact that the majority of the public in Serbia sees Russia as an alternative to the West, by which it feels betrayed, abandoned and never fully accepted. This has resulted in the enormous popularity of Russia, which is now a major impediment for Serbia joining the EU sanctions against Moscow or any overt anti-Russian policies.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Public Opinion, Soft Power, and Foreign Influence
Political Geography:
Russia, Eurasia, and Serbia

13. Public Perception of Serbian Foreign Policy in the Midst of the War in Ukraine

Author:
Maja Bjeloš, Luka Šterić, and Vuk Vuksanović
Publication Date:
12-2022
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Belgrade Centre for Security Policy (BCSP)
Abstract:
We present you the analysis of the results of the public opinion survey on Serbian foreign policy and relations with great powers. The war in Ukraine did not significantly affect the perception of the Serbian public regarding the major issues of Serbian foreign and security policy. In this context, this relates to how Serbian citizens think about the influence of great powers in their country and how the public perceives its relations with Russia and Western security institutions, the EU and NATO. The public opinion surveys also showed that the issue of Kosovo is still being perceived as a major foreign policy priority. There is a powerful cynicism in how the Serbian public views great power influences, as most respondents believe that external great powers bribe Serbian politicians and moguls to further their interests in the country. Russia and China are perceived as close foreign policy partners of Serbia, putting them in clear advantage over those who favour the EU on that front. The respondents also believed that Russia and China are sincere friends of Serbia and not players guided by their self-interest. As opposed to the study conducted by the Belgrade Centre for Security Policy (BCSP) in 2020, which noted that Serbs perceived Chinese influence in the country as more positive than Russian influence, the latest survey shows that those who believe Russian influence in Serbia is positive have a slight edge over those who believe the same about Chinese influence. This is most likely the result of the fact that China has not been in the spotlight in recent months. As opposed to Russia and China, the EU is being cynically perceived as a self-interested actor. On that same front, there are more of those who perceive the EU’s policies towards Serbia as hostile than those who perceive these policies as friendly. When it comes to perceptions of the US, the spectrum is dominated by those who perceive the US as a self-interested power and those who perceive it as an enemy of Serbia. The public also treats the issue of foreign direct investments (FDI) as important for the country’s foreign policy. However, the FDI are more likely to be considered highly important among those who favour the EU membership than among those who oppose the membership. Despite Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, the public opinion survey demonstrates that Russia is still a major vector in Serbian foreign policy. Extremely positive perception of Russia is a product of recent Serbian history but also of the radical pro-Russian narrative that was pushed for years in the pro-government media and tabloids. Serbian public largely subscribes to the Russian point of view on the Ukraine war, with the majority blaming NATO and the US for its outbreak. The majority of the Serbian public is against introducing sanctions against Russia, with the majority doing so on the ground that Serbia experienced sanctions in the 1990s. This fact demonstrates that Serbian perceptions of Russia are frequently based on historical experiences from the 1990s. Belgrade Center for Security Policy conducted public opinion survey in the period from October 3 to 17, 2022, as part of the Western Balkans Security Barometer project led by Kosovar Centre for Security Studies with the support of the National Endowment for Democracy. The survey is conducted on a sample of 1,020 citizens of Serbia.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Public Opinion, and Russia-Ukraine War
Political Geography:
Europe and Serbia

14. Is Serbia Still a Troublemaker in the Balkans?

Author:
Faruk Ajeti
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Austrian Institute for International Affairs (OIIP)
Abstract:
As one of the largest countries of the Balkans, Serbia’s troubled past also poses big dilemmas for the future. Its latest political and military cooperation with Russia and China appears to be an effort to build a strategic neutrality with “Serbian characteristics.” But at what cost?
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Neutrality, and Cooperation
Political Geography:
Russia, China, Eastern Europe, Serbia, and Balkans

15. Assessments and foreign policy implications of the national security of the Republic of Serbia

Author:
Miroslav Mitrovic
Publication Date:
06-2021
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Security and Defence Quarterly
Institution:
War Studies University
Abstract:
National security determines the degree to which endangering national interests that sublimate national values is absent. With a review of the genesis and framework of the modern interpretation of national security, the paper discusses its approaches to endangerment. A retrospective of the ideas of endangerment in the paradigm of the changed physiognomy of contemporary conflicts and dynamic geopolitical movements creates the need for an innovative approach and prediction in national security strategic assessments. The paper provides an overview of the internal and external political aspects of national security and a framework for the actions of prominent entities according to the perceived foreign policy interests of importance for the Republic of Serbia’s security. By analysing common and conflicting interests of Serbia and forces that have geopolitical interests in the Western Balkans, it is possible to establish the most objective framework for predicting the trend of relationship development and the vector of influence. The paper analyses Serbia’s interactions with Russia, the United States, and the EU. The findings point to a complex situation regarding Serbia’s national security, where Russia seeks to maintain its strong soft power presence, the United States wants close cooperation and insistence on recognising Kosovo’s independence, and the EU does not vigorously stimulate or promote Serbia’s European integration. In that way, a concrete contribution is made to the developing of strategic assessments of possible trends of importance for the Republic of Serbia’s security, as well as to the achievement of declared national goals.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, National Security, European Union, Geopolitics, and Strategic Interests
Political Geography:
Russia, Eastern Europe, Serbia, Balkans, and United States of America

16. The Biden Agenda: How the new administration can help Western Balkans out of stagnation

Author:
Muhamet Brajshori
Publication Date:
09-2021
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Kosovar Centre for Security Studies (KCSS)
Abstract:
President Biden’s administration has shown signs of seeking to focus in the region by having a nor-mative-based policy in place to addresses issues that empower the region and help the region by undertaking reforms and making progress on Euro-Atlantic integration. One of the main aspects of this re-engagement will be the sensitive political issues that hold the region in deadlocks, such as the complicated relations between Kosovo and Serbia, and the risk that Bosnia and Herzegovina will turn into a totally failed state in the heart of Europe. A key element of Washington’s engagement will be closer coordination with European allies to complete the remaining open issues in the Western Balkans. But the challenges are immense and the expectations are high.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Regional Integration, and Joe Biden
Political Geography:
Eastern Europe, Kosovo, Serbia, Balkans, United States of America, and Bosnia and Herzegovina

17. US foreign policy in the Balkans: new chapter

Author:
Vuk Vuksanovic
Publication Date:
04-2021
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Belgrade Centre for Security Policy (BCSP)
Abstract:
What challenges the new American administration will face in the Balkans, and how should it approach them? Read in the latest analysis of BCSP researcher Vuk Vuksanović. When Joseph Biden defeated Donald Trump in the 2020 US presidential elections, the Balkan countries were not neutral on that race. Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić made a failed bet on Trump, hoping that under Trump, he will get a less painful settlement of the Kosovo dispute and an opportunity to finally make Belgrade a partner of Washington, after several decades. Vučić still congratulated Biden for his win alongside several other Balkan leaders who were probably happier about Biden’s win than him. US foreign policy towards the Balkans under Trump has been marked by transactional logic and disdain towards the European Union, best symbolised in the economic normalisation agreement between Belgrade and Priština brokered in September 2020 by Trump. Many policy hands, including Nicholas Burns, former US diplomat and one of Biden’s advisors, now expect that Biden will display US leadership in the region while cooperating closely with the European Union. The US foreign policy will have to deal with three sets of challenges: the unresolved Kosovo dispute, democratic backsliding in the region, and the presence of non-Western powers like Russia and China. While US power is a necessary element in resolving these challenges, the Biden administration will not be able to offer quick fixes.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, International Cooperation, Governance, Elections, and Leadership
Political Geography:
Europe, Serbia, North America, and United States of America

18. The Dragon Lands in Belgrade: The Drivers of Sino-Serbian Partnership

Author:
Vuk Vuksanovic
Publication Date:
07-2021
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
LSE IDEAS
Abstract:
In recent years, the partnership between Serbia and China has been elevated to a historically unprecedented level. This partnership manifests itself through Chinese economic statecraft, technological partnership, security partnership, with political ties reaching an unprecedented degree during the COVID-19 pandemic. However, as Vuk Vuksanovic examines, the future of this partnership will be dependent on the trajectory of China’s relationship with the West. As US-China relations are becoming adversarial, and as China’s relations with the EU are shaken, it will become increasingly difficult and risky for Belgrade to maintain its ties with Beijing. From ‘vaccine diplomacy’ to ‘debt-trap diplomacy’, this Strategic Update examines the Sino-Serbian partnership we are witnessing and what the future has in store for Serbian policymakers.
Topic:
Security, Foreign Policy, Economics, Partnerships, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
China, Asia, and Serbia

19. Many Faces of Serbian Foreign Policy Public Opinion and Geopolitical Balancing

Author:
Maja Bjelos, Vuk Vuksanovic, and Luka Steric
Publication Date:
11-2020
Content Type:
Commentary and Analysis
Institution:
Belgrade Centre for Security Policy (BCSP)
Abstract:
According to a public opinion survey Serbian citizens identify Russia and China as their greatest friends. As the country's most important foreign policy priorities, citizens recognize preserving Kosovo as part of Serbia, strengthening cooperation with neighboring countries and strengthening cooperation with Russia. More than half of the citizens do not support Serbia's membership in the EU. Most respondents (40%) perceive Russia as Serbia’s best friend, and 72% believe that Russia’s influence in the country is positive, which is an increase of 11% compared to the results of the survey from 2017. Only two percent of people believe that Russia’s attitude towards Serbia is hostile. After Russia, second place on the list of friends is reserved for China (16 percent of respondents). The growth of positive attitudes towards China is especially visible after the beginning of the pandemic, which is proved by the fact that 75% of respondents believe that China provided the most assistance to Serbia in the fight against the pandemic, although there are no official data on the amount of Chinese aid. According to available data, the largest donor was the European Union (EU), and only 3% of Serbian citizens recognize that. In addition, almost 90% of respondents believe that the Chinese influence in the country is positive, which is an increase of over 30 percent compared to the survey from 2017. Although EU membership has been a strategic goal of Serbia since 2005, only 9% of respondents believe that it is the main foreign policy priority of Serbia. Citizens recognize the preservation of Kosovo as part of Serbia, strengthening cooperation with neighboring countries and strengthening cooperation with Russia as the three most important foreign policy priorities. Although Serbia is a candidate for EU membership, only 20% of respondents believe that the state should harmonize its foreign policy with Brussels. The results of the survey show that the majority of 51% do not support Serbia’s membership in the EU, compared to 46% of respondents who would opt for membership. This result indicates that the number of opponents of European integration has increased since 2017, when only 35% of citizens voted against EU membership. The number of respondents who believe that Serbia is surrounded by mostly friends in the region has almost doubled compared to 2017 and now is over 40%, but there is a slight increase in the opinion that Serbia has more enemies in the neighborhood, which now think a little less than 50% of citizens. When asked who Serbia’s biggest enemy is, 30% of respondents identified Croatia, 20% Albania and 13% the United States. Slightly more than 70% of the respondents believe that there will be no outbreak of armed conflict in the Balkans in the next five years, which is an increase of 20 percent compared to 2017. The powerful emotional pull of the Kosovo dispute is also demonstrated by the fact that 52% of respondents believe that Serbia should intervene militarily in Kosovo in the case of a conflict and 47% of respondents would personally join their compatriots in the case of conflict. In contrast, 69% of respondents said that Serbia should not intervene if the same situation occurred in Montenegro, and 58% if the conflict broke out in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the majority of citizens would not get involved in those conflicts. It is encouraging that two thirds of those interviewed believe that lasting peace between Serbs and Albanians is possible, and half of all respondents think that it is possible to achieve this only in the case of a peaceful settlement of the dispute over the status of Kosovo. Public opinion survey was conducted by CeSID for the needs of the Belgrade Centre for Security Policy (BCSP) in the period from September 15 to October 5, 2020, on a representative sample of 1,200 citizens of Serbia.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Governance, Public Opinion, Leadership, and Conflict
Political Geography:
Europe, Serbia, and Balkans

20. Serbia's state of play regarding Chapters 23 and 24: One step forward, two steps back

Author:
Jana Juzová
Publication Date:
12-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Europeum Institute for European Policy
Abstract:
The discussion on the future of EU enlargement was opened again this year. After yet another disappointment for Albania and North Macedonia at the European Council’s session in October, the discussion turned towards a revision of the enlargement methodology. The argument that the enlargement process needs to undergo a reform, put forward by France as a justification of its October veto for Albania and North Macedonia, is based on the fact that the current process is not delivering adequately. That is true especially for the current frontrunners, Montenegro and Serbia, setting a bad example for other candidate countries in the region and giving more reasons to oppose enlargement to some already sceptical EU Member States. Both countries’ progress on the accession path has recently slowed down significantly, with some suggesting that the current low number of chapters that are being opened and closed, and progress only on “technical” rather than substantial matters, is due to the serious problems both countries have in the area of rule of law and democratic standards.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Regional Cooperation, European Union, and Negotiation
Political Geography:
Europe, Eastern Europe, and Serbia