In recent years, Europe has started resembling a laboratory for testing and experimenting with democracy. Far-right parties are gaining ground on the continent like never before, and polls show that right-wing political ideas are becoming more and more popular in nations like Belgium, Portugal, Spain, Finland and Austria. Georgia Meloni in Italy, Fidesz (the political party of Viktor Orbán) in Hungary, and Marine Le Pen in France are a few instances of authoritarian, right-winged or conservative parties gaining power.
This rise shows not just the normalisation of far-right politics, but also a wider shift in European democracy, where nationalistic and populist currents modify political involvement norms and bend institutions.
Smaller and less spotlighted countries, often viewed as peripheral to Europe’s political core, can still offer critical insight into how shifts from democracy and freedom take root and evolve beneath the surface, and Serbia is one such country. It is frequently dismissed, even though it reflects the same forces reshaping the continent: rising populism, nationalist and right-wing influence, creeping authoritarianism, and the erosion of institutional checks and balances.
Serbia reflects broader European tendencies in which political and economic interests take precedence over democratic principles, illustrating how populism, strategic pragmatism, selective rule-of-law enforcement, and opportunistic diplomacy threaten the continent’s democratic integrity.
The Jadar Valley Lithium Project
With the Jadar project at its center, the EU and Serbia formally established a strategic raw materials agreement in July 2024. With a focus on strict environmental, social, and governance (ESG) requirements, this agreement seeks to build value chains for electric vehicles, batteries, and raw materials.
According to Heinrich Böll Stiftung, the Jadar Valley lithium project revealed conflicts between centralized authority, international investment, and citizen participation. The Serbian government put the project on hold in response to tens of thousands of protesters, presenting the pause as an indication that it was paying attention to the public and demonstrating its responsiveness and accountability. As a result, the government was able to fortify its political legitimacy, consolidate power, and mold the narrative in advance of elections.
Driven mainly by economic concerns related to the green transition, Germany and the European Union have been major supporters of the Jadar Valley lithium mining project in Serbia. Olaf Scholz, the former chancellor, has openly supported the project, calling it “an important European project” that will benefit both Europe and Serbia. The German government has continued to promote the environmentally harmful mining in the Jadar Valley despite criticism from members of the Left Party (Die Linke) and environmental organizations in Germany and the rest of Europe. Although Friedrich Merz, the new chancellor, has refrained from making public remarks regarding the Jadar Valley project, Germany is still upholding the legal and strategic validity of the Memorandum of Understanding on crucial raw materials and battery value chains that was signed with Serbia on July 19, 2024.
This illustrates how, even in developed democracies, economic demands can take precedence over democratic and environmental ideals. Germany’s quest for strategic resources demonstrates its willingness to put up with authoritarian rule in Serbia as long as it advances its geopolitical and economic objectives.
European Tolerance of Authoritarian Practices Evident in Serbian Student Protests
The on-going student protests that have consumed the country since late 2024 demonstrate not only Serbia’s authoritarian practices but also the tolerance of these practices by the EU, Germany, and other European actors. The terrible fall of the Novi Sad railway station canopy, which claimed 16 lives and exposed widespread corruption in the administration, served as the impetus for these protests. Students responded by calling for responsibility and reforms through large-scale demonstrations that included marches, strikes, and significant traffic jams.
The Serbian government has used a number of strategies to quell discontent, even if the movement is peaceful and asks for justice rather than elections. During protests, authorities have used disproportionate force and arrested a large number of demonstrators, almost exclusively students. In August 2025, for example, 79 protesters were arrested by police, and there were allegations of demonstrators being attacked with batons and other weapons. Citing its support for anti-corruption rallies, the government has also stopped sponsoring the Exit Festival, a significant cultural event that fueled the protests.
Particularly during the student-led protests, Germany and the European Union have come under fire for what is seen as their apathy and tolerance toward the authoritarian policies of President Aleksandar Vučić’s regime in Serbia. Although the EU has formally embraced democratic principles, its response to the protests has been relatively subdued, as Euronews reports. The European Commission has stated its support for the rule of law and freedom of assembly in Serbia, but there haven’t been many tangible steps taken to solve the situation, according to the European Western Balkans press. This silence has been viewed by many as an implicit acceptance of the Serbian government’s harsh measures.
To draw attention to the decline of democratic principles in Serbia, a group of Serbian students set off on a 1,300-kilometer bicycle trip from Novi Sad to Strasbourg, France, at the beginning of 2025. The students’ annoyance with the EU’s lack of significant backing for their cause was brought to light by this campaign. Members of the European Parliament debated the political situation in Serbia in February 2025. Although this was an opportunity for the EU to articulate concrete measures towards the addressing the students’ demands and the ongoing protests in Serbia, the discussion did not result in any concrete steps or pressure on the Serbian government to heed the demands of the demonstrators.
As a result, youth in Serbia lost faith in the EU’s willingness to adopt a strong stance. Many people feel abandoned by Brussels, as reported by EU News, particularly as the EU still puts its economic interests ahead of advancing democratic principles in the region.
Political and economic factors have caused political opportunity and collaboration to take precedence over outspoken criticism of Serbia’s internal political dynamics, despite clear evidence of government repression, excessive use of force against peaceful protesters, and the curtailment of civic and media freedoms. According to several German media outlets (Balkan Green Energy News and Heinrich Böll Stiftung), Germany’s stance on Serbian issues, for example, is strongly impacted by strategic considerations, including the desire to gain access to vital lithium raw materials through the Jadar Valley project. On the other hand, several media outlets, like Reuters, Financial Times, and Peoples Dispatch, present the Jadar project favorably and highlight its possible advantages. The EU’s cautious approach to the Serbian crisis is also a result of its larger geopolitical policy, which aims to preserve power in the Western Balkans.
These patterns are reinforced by the broader rise of right-wing and populist movements within Europe’s own political landscape, which shape the tone of external engagement. Governments influenced by these currents often favor pragmatic, stability-oriented relations over insisting on enforcement of regulations, leading to a more tolerant stance toward authoritarian tendencies.
The Cost of Europe’s Voluntary Blindness
Democratic ideals are frequently maintained as non-negotiable in the capitals of the major EU member states and the corridors of Brussels. Yet, these principles are sometimes subordinated to strategic considerations in smaller economies, such as Serbia. This paradox is best illustrated by the European Union’s approach to Serbia.
This behavior pattern is not specific to Serbia. Smaller countries in Europe are frequently at the mercy of more powerful geopolitical forces. The EU’s reputation as a champion of democratic values is brought into question by its uneven application of democratic norms. The EU’s commitment to democracy seems malleable when strategic interests are involved, which undermines its enlargement agenda and creates impressions of duplicity.
The Serbian predicament is a microcosm of the larger problems facing Europe. It draws attention to the conflict between democratic ideals and economic interests as well as the dangers of ignoring the decline of democracy in peripheral nations. The EU must decide whether to balance its strategic objectives with its commitment to democracy or to ignore the decline of democratic principles at its periphery as it continues to interact with Serbia and other countries in comparable circumstances.
Europe faces a larger conundrum in its approach to Serbia: how to preserve democratic principles while negotiating geopolitical and economic matters. In addition to being a regional problem, the cost of deliberate blindness to democratic backsliding in smaller economies poses a threat to the integrity of Europe’s democratic system overall. The circumstances necessitate a reassessment of the EU’s interactions with its neighbors as well as a fresh dedication to guaranteeing respect of democratic values.
