According to the Croatian media outlet Vecernji, the situation in Serbia has further deteriorated over the past year, and EU accession has remained largely declarative. During a debate in the European Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee, it was suggested that suspension of financial aid to Serbia should be considered.
“Unfortunately, Serbia’s reforms related to EU accession have generally slowed significantly. In some areas, there has even been regression, particularly in the fields of rule of law and systemic democratic standards,” said the European Parliament rapporteur for Serbia, Tonino Picula, while presenting his draft report on Serbia’s progress.
Picula attributed the slow pace of accession to limited progress in dialogue with Kosovo, the ongoing lack of alignment with the EU’s Common Foreign and Security Policy, insufficient political will, frequent rhetoric against EU officials, worsening conditions for free media and civil society, and ignoring recommendations for electoral reform. He also criticized certain EU actors who for years appeased Serbia in the name of stability.
“The policy of turning a blind eye and pushing stability as an excuse by some European actors has not produced results in transforming the country, but unfortunately has only pushed it further away from accession,” Picula noted. He added that although Serbia officially declared EU accession as a strategic goal, this has not been reflected in practice, citing President Aleksandar Vučić’s absence from the EU–Western Balkans Summit in December and his participation in the military parade in Moscow last May as examples.
Picula emphasized that good neighborly relations are a key aspect of EU integration. “Serbia is expected to take a more active and constructive role in addressing the fate of missing persons from the wars in Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Kosovo. Authorities in Serbia are also called to cooperate with judicial bodies of member states in prosecuting war crimes from the 1990s,” he said.
Austrian MEP Helmut Brandstaetter criticized the Serbian government harshly, saying, “I am convinced the Serbian government does not want to join the EU; all they want is EU money.” He added that aid should go to civil society, not the government, noting that EU funds are often misrepresented domestically.
Other MEPs highlighted the hostile reception the EP delegation received in Belgrade, with negative coverage in pro-government media and disparaging comments from Vučić and Ana Brnabić. Croatian MEP Zheljana Zovko urged Serbian citizens to uphold a pro-European stance and hold their government accountable, while Davor Ivo Stier Davor Ivo Stier warned that Serbia is moving further away from the EU and becoming a security concern in Southeast Europe.
Stier also noted that while the Hungarian minority’s status has improved, challenges remain for other minorities, including Romanian, Bulgarian, and Croatian communities.
In conclusion, Picula stressed that the debate shows Serbia’s path toward the EU is in serious jeopardy, primarily due to the government consistently neglecting crucial aspects of necessary reforms. As a candidate country, Serbia’s internal situation significantly impacts EU enlargement policy in the Western Balkans. MEPs have until April 9 to submit amendments; the committee is expected to vote on the report on June 3–4 before sending it to plenary debate.
