Ivana Stradner of the U.S.-based Foundation for Defense of Democracies has commented on Serbia’s Student List movement, describing it as ideologically diverse, with pro-Western, pro-Russian and neutral voices.
According to Stradner, what brought these different groups together was their demand for the restoration of the rule of law. By focusing on democracy rather than foreign policy, she argued, the movement avoided Aleksandar Vučić’s strategy of polarizing society through geopolitics.
But Stradner warned that the real test lies ahead.
“Appearances in Russian media and statements opposing sanctions against Russia are already emerging. However, since a government has not yet been formed and presidential elections are still ahead, it is too early to draw firm conclusions. Strategic ambiguity may be understandable,” she wrote.
Stradner also warned that Serbia’s biggest risk would be a change in leadership without a fundamental change in the country’s political direction.
“The last thing Serbia needs is a change of leadership without a fundamental change in political direction,” she said, referring to the possibility of a political transition that leaves the existing system largely intact.
She recalled that Serbian nationalism survived the political transition following the fall of Slobodan Milošević, warning against what she called a “Koštunica 2.0” scenario — a new leadership that changes the faces in power without transforming the political system.
Stradner argued that Russian influence is deeply embedded in Serbia’s institutional structures. Energy dependence gives Moscow leverage for political pressure, while established ties within Serbia’s intelligence and security apparatus pose another challenge.
“Changing individuals is not enough; institutions and systems must change, particularly the Security Intelligence Agency (BIA) and military intelligence,” she stated.
She added that diversifying Serbia’s energy sources would take time but ultimately depend on political will.
Stradner also said she was monitoring how individuals linked to Serbia’s security apparatus were repositioning themselves on social media. She described these developments as concerning and significant, while noting that she was still mapping the patterns of behaviour.
In her assessment, Serbia’s transformation should not be measured by who takes power, but by whether the new leadership is prepared to dismantle the system that has kept the country trapped in the same geopolitical cycle.
“A change of government does not necessarily mean a change of system. That will be the most important test,” Stradner concluded.
