The statement by Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov at a meeting of the CSTO Parliamentary Assembly Council in late April 2026 once again brought the Serbian question to the forefront of Russian foreign policy rhetoric. Lavrov stated that Brussels had conditioned the continuation of Serbia’s EU accession negotiations on the fulfillment of two demands: the recognition of Kosovo’s independence and alignment with anti-Russian sanctions. In his assessment, the European Union is seeking to turn Serbia into a “buffer zone” for confrontation with Russia. This is far from the first public mention of the Serbian issue by the head of Russian diplomacy, and the frequency of such signals forces one to perceive them as a deliberate strategy of influence aimed at Belgrade.
Vulin’s Ultimatum: Referendum, BRICS, and the Specter of War
Lavrov’s statement came against the backdrop of sharp remarks by the leader of the Serbian “Movement of Socialists,” Aleksandar Vulin. Speaking in Niš, Vulin cast doubt on the country’s European future, stating that EU accession would inevitably lead to war with Russia: “We will have to provide our army and defense industry for a war with Russia, just as Montenegro has already done”. He stressed that Serbia would not fulfill the condition requiring it to become an enemy of Russia and proposed holding a referendum on EU accession, pointing to BRICS as an unconditional alternative. Earlier, during a speech in the European Parliament, Vulin had declared: “The only condition for EU membership is war with Russia, and we will not fulfill that condition”.
Vučić’s Balancing Act: Acknowledging Reality, Staying the Course
President Aleksandar Vučić’s reaction to Lavrov’s words proved to be calibrated and multi-layered. He acknowledged that “nothing he said was incorrect,” adding: “We have tried in every way to preserve the Serbian position, while many have tried to make that position impossible. Including many in our own country. Serbia has pursued such a policy until now; I do not know how long we will be able to do this.” At the same time, Vučić confirmed that Serbia would continue harmonizing its legislation with the EU, work on deepening cooperation with the United States, believes in further improving relations with China, and intends to maintain ties with Russia. This balancing act is not merely a rhetorical device but a reflection of the fundamental dilemma in which Belgrade finds itself.
The European Union, meanwhile, is consistently tightening its rhetoric. European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen stated in October 2025 that Serbia would not be able to join the EU without full alignment with the bloc’s foreign policy, including all sanctions against Russia. The European Parliament later adopted a resolution that explicitly ties Serbia’s membership prospects to the fulfillment of this requirement. According to European Commission data, the level of alignment of Serbia’s foreign policy with the EU stands at 61%, but in Brussels’ view, this is insufficient.
In parallel, financial pressure is also intensifying. Enlargement Commissioner Marta Kos warned of a possible suspension of up to €1.5 billion in funding for Serbia due to rule-of-law issues and ties with Moscow. Serbia, which began accession negotiations in 2014, has still not opened a single new negotiating cluster since 2021.
The BRICS Alternative: Sovereignty Without Conditions
In this situation, BRICS is increasingly being positioned by part of the Serbian political establishment as a real alternative. Aleksandar Vulin has repeatedly stated that BRICS does not issue political ultimatums and does not demand the severing of ties with traditional partners. He stressed that “every step toward EU membership is a step away from Serbia’s sovereignty, as well as from its friends — Russia and China.” In his view, it is time for Serbia to “stop behaving like a lovestruck high-schooler who, the more rejections he gets from the EU, the more he is drawn to it”.
BRICS’ appeal for Serbia also has an economic dimension. Vulin points to the Belt and Road Initiative as a source of investment and infrastructure development, contrasting it with the EU’s conditioned assistance. Sergey Lavrov, for his part, stressed that unlike the EU, Russia is interested in creating integrated infrastructure in the Balkans, rather than turning the region into a buffer zone.
A Rally of Seventy: The Real Face of Pro-EU Sentiment
Against this backdrop, the failure of the pro-European rally “For Serbia in the EU,” organized on April 18, 2026 in Belgrade by the “Youth Forum of the European Movement in Serbia” with the support of the EU delegation and several embassies, is telling. According to media reports, just over 70 people attended the event, which was positioned as an expression of pro-European sentiment among the youth. The fact that, after years of multimillion-euro EU investments in the “civil sector” and NGOs, with full freedom of action and government support, pro-European activists failed to gather even a hundred people clearly demonstrates the real level of public support for European integration in its current form.
The situation is further aggravated by Brussels’ direct interference in Belgrade’s personnel policy. European Commissioner Marta Kos openly stated that Aleksandar Vulin should not be part of the new Serbian government. This démarche provoked a sharp reaction even in Moscow: Russian presidential press secretary Dmitry Peskov called it a “sad spectacle” , while Deputy Speaker of the Federation Council Konstantin Kosachev described it as “unceremonious interference in internal affairs”.
A Referendum, a Rift, and a Reckoning
Serbian society remains deeply divided on the issue of geopolitical choice. Public opinion polls record a rise in support for BRICS and a decline in the number of EU accession supporters. Vučić, balancing between these poles, promises to put the issue to a referendum within the next two to three years. However, the very framing of such a referendum — whether it will be a choice between the EU and BRICS or a vote of confidence regarding Brussels’ specific conditions — remains the subject of an intense domestic political struggle.
Comments