kyivpost.com <https://www.kyivpost.com/opinion/54448>  


Opinion: Odesa as a Mirror of Serbia’s European Future


Dr. Orhan Dragas

9–11 minutes

  _____  

When Serbian <https://www.kyivpost.com/topic/serbia>  President Aleksandar 
Vučić arrived in Odesa <https://www.kyivpost.com/topic/odesa>  on June 10, it 
was not just a visit. It was a political and moral step rarely seen in today’s 
world – an act that carries weight despite the avalanche of pressure, 
condemnations, and threats coming from the other side of Europe. At a time when 
many are silent, weighing in, or retreating in the face of Moscow’s aggressive 
narrative, Vučić decided to be present, to be visible, and to choose a side – 
the side of the victim, not the aggressor.

Vučić’s visit to Ukraine, the first since Russia’s brutal invasion began in 
2022, comes at a time when the Kremlin is increasing pressure on all states 
that maintain even the slightest contact with Kyiv, which it considers its zone 
of interest. In recent weeks, the Russian Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) 
released a statement directly accusing the Serbian president of “betraying 
fraternal Slavic peoples” and supplying Ukraine with ammunition and weapons. 
During Vučić’s visit to Odesa, Russian Foreign Ministry spokeswoman Maria 
Zakharova said from the highest state level, “The countries traveling to Odesa 
should ask themselves whose side they are on.”


JOIN US ON TELEGRAM


Follow our coverage of the war on the @Kyivpost_official 
<https://t.me/Kyivpost_official> .

The answer is clear. Serbia is on the side of those who defend their homeland, 
their people, and their right to exist. And this answer has a political price.

In today’s world full of ambiguity, Vučić’s decision to personally attend the 
“Ukraine-Southeast Europe” summit is a turning point. Serbia is thus sending a 
signal that it will not be blackmailed, that it will not agree to false 
fraternization based on domination and subjugation. Vučić comes from a country 
that is at a crossroads: between historical closeness to Russia and a clear 
European orientation, which Serbian citizens have repeatedly confirmed in 
elections.

 <https://www.kyivpost.com/post/54542> 

Other Topics of Interest


Ukraine Strikes Back: Troops Liberate Village in Sumy, Push Forward in Pokrovsk 
<https://www.kyivpost.com/post/54542>  


Ukrainians have reportedly liberated the village of Andriivka in the Sumy 
region and made gains near Pokrovsk. Independent confirmations of the 
liberation are still pending.

In this case, Odesa is also a symbolic city. Odesa embodies both a city moment 
and a city message. By his presence alone, the Serbian president has reaffirmed 
Ukraine’s territorial integrity and solidarity with its people. This support is 
not given because it is expected or easy, but rather because it is the right 
thing to do.

President Vučić chose a side in Odesa. And it was not the side of violence, but 
the side of justice.

The information about what President Vučić offered during the meeting with 
President Zelensky – that Serbia would rebuild (fully or partially) two 
Ukrainian cities or a smaller region destroyed by the war – leaves a 
particularly strong impression. This offer is not a protocolar phrase. It is a 
concrete, humane, and politically responsible initiative that sends a clear 
message: Serbia will not remain neutral when it comes to human suffering. This 
offer has the potential to become a symbol of a new phase in relations between 
the two countries, but also clear proof that Belgrade wants to contribute to 
peace, reconstruction, and solidarity in Europe.

At a time when many talk big, the act of concrete help has enormous moral 
value. Serbia, a country that has gone through suffering, destruction, and 
humiliation, knows how much it means when someone offers a helping hand. And 
that is why this offer should be received with gratitude and be the beginning 
of a broader partnership based not on interests but on values.

And while the Ukrainian public saw the Serbian president’s visit as a sign of 
courage and future rapprochement, Vučić is facing a familiar, but now stronger, 
front of resistance in Serbia. Protests throughout Serbia, especially after the 
tragedy in Novi Sad <https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c0qdyg8yn5yo>  last 
November, when a railway canopy collapsed, have exacerbated the political 
environment and increased the need for a foreign policy balance.

Despite the opposition’s declarative messages that Serbia must be pro-European, 
a large part of society, as well as the opposition itself, is still under the 
strong influence of Russian narratives, which are fueled daily by para-state 
and pro-Russian media in Serbia. Certain actors of the so-called pro-European 
opposition publicly question: “Who authorized Vučić to offer help for the 
reconstruction of Ukrainian cities?” – as if solidarity and moral 
responsibility require administrative validation. This criticism is consciously 
or unconsciously wrapped up in the same narrative that has been coming from 
Moscow for years – the one in which Serbia must remain passive, neutral, and in 
the past.

 Serbia is the province of no one. It owes allegiance to no one but its own 
citizens and its own principles.

But the real storm comes from outside. The Russian news apparatus reacted 
immediately. A network of portals and Telegram channels close to the Kremlin 
have already launched an orchestrated discrediting campaign on social media. 
Vučić is portrayed as a traitor, as a man who “sells Serbian friendship for 
cheap points in Brussels.” The Kremlin does not tolerate disobedience, 
especially when it comes from a country it considers its historical area.

Maria Zakharova’s statement represents not only open political pressure but 
also unacceptable interference in the internal affairs of a sovereign state. 
Her statement that the countries that “go to Odesa should ask themselves whose 
side they are on” inevitably recalls the vocabulary of an era when Moscow was 
considered as the center of the world and all others as satellites. Serbia is 
the province of no one. It owes allegiance to no one but its own citizens and 
its own principles. And these principles include neither silence in the face of 
aggression nor submission to external political coercion.

Zakharova’s message, full of historical revisionism, accusations, and 
ideological fanaticism, cannot be interpreted as anything apart from an attempt 
to discipline a Balkan state that has shown signs of acting independently. This 
is not diplomacy; this is political punishment. And Serbia should not remain 
silent, even if the blows were verbal (for the time being).

This is precisely why this situation goes beyond the boundaries of a bilateral 
meeting. Vučić’s visit to Ukraine became a test for the West. If Serbia and its 
president stand alone against the Russian political and intelligence machinery, 
it is not only a message to Belgrade but also to all other countries trying to 
take a step out of the Russian sphere of influence – that they will be left to 
their own devices.

That is why it is critical that the United States, the European Union, and 
their allies provide explicit, unequivocal, and operational support to 
President Vučić and the citizens of Serbia. This includes security cooperation, 
intelligence sharing, and economic assistance, but also political protection. 
Because the Kremlin will not accept such steps from Belgrade. They will try to 
weaken, delegitimize, and even overthrow Vučić – using all methods of hybrid 
warfare, including destabilization on the media, economic pressure, and strong 
infiltration into Serbia’s security structures. If they fail at the 
institutional level, they will try it on the streets by instrumentalizing 
protests and violent incidents even more intensively. Their goal is clear: to 
bring Serbia back under their control, even if it means chaos.

Ukraine and Serbia have different paths but similar struggles. Both countries 
are confronted with external pressures, internal weaknesses, and the need to 
define themselves in a world where there is no more room for vague positions. 
In this context, Vučić’s visit to Odesa is not just a political gesture. It is 
an emotional bridge, it is a metaphor of resistance, and it is a silent but 
strong message that Serbia sees what is happening and that it is not blind to 
injustice.

President Vučić chose a side in Odesa. And it was not the side of violence, but 
the side of justice. It was not a populist move but a strategic step forward. 
At a time when many remain silent, Belgrade has spoken. And let this sentence 
be remembered.

The views expressed in this opinion article are the author’s and not 
necessarily those of Kyiv Post.  

 

-- 
http:www.antic.org
--- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"SERBIAN NEWS NETWORK" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/senet/03a801dbddcb%24c25dac20%2447190460%24%40gmail.com.

Reply via email to