Image Source: Mašina/People’s Dispatch
This article was first published for and by the International Foundation Groenlinks.
This article is the first in a series of conversations in which International Foundation Groenlinks catches up with green activists from different parts of the world. The series looks beyond specific moments or campaigns, focusing instead on how activists reflect on their work, their contexts, and the state of politics today. In this first instalment, we speak with Andrej, a green activist from Serbia
On the 17th of January, thousands of people rallied in The Serbian City Novi Sad. This protest was initiated by the university students who have led more than a year of mass demonstrations aimed at fighting against endemic corruption during the ruling of President Aleksander Vučić. These students have led protest against the corrupt ruling of the president for more than a year. These internal conflicts are hurting Serbia’s prospects as an EU candidate country. While Serbia’s candidate status remains unchanged, the attitude of the Serbian people is shifting. A growing number of protesters are increasingly critical of the European Union. This opposition stems from the belief that European institutions are making deals with Vučić and supporting highly controversial projects, primarily the Jadar lithium mining project.
Overall, there have been a lot of critical views on the EU’s approach to enlargement in the Western Balkans, with critical analysts saying that “the EU talks reform but fuels democratic backsliding, by rewarding autocrats and applying conditionality inconsistently”. Would a neo-idealist approach towards an EU enlargement policy work better in the case of the Western Balkan?
We talked about these topics with Andrej Zlatović a Serbian politician and activist. Andrej completed archeology studies at the Faculty of Philosophy in Belgrade, after which he enrolled in cultural studies at the Faculty of Political Sciences. For many years, he engaged in direct actions in various movements before he started working on systemic changes, initially in the Green Youth of Serbia. Simultaneously with his work at the Center for Green Politics, Andrej works as a co-spokesperson in the Federation of Young European Greens (FYEG).
His main topics of interest are housing, antimilitarism, radical democracy and decolonialism. Within the Center for Green Politics, Andrej deals with the issues of the youngest and oldest in our society, and the implementation of informal education.
What made you become politically active? What started your interest?
“It all started at Archeology (my bachelor). During my bachelor’s studies, I began contemplating deep questions about what it means to be human, what it means to live well, and how societies throughout history have decided to organize themselves. I quickly realized that the answers found in history apply directly to our modern world.”
He moved from theory to direct action by organizing a guerrilla ecological organization in Belgrade and volunteering at food banks. “My entry into formal politics was surprisingly simple: I met a friend for coffee, and they invited me to join their organization. To me, joining a movement through a friend group is the most stable way to get involved. When you like the people and share their values, working together becomes a natural byproduct of that trust.
Today, that journey has led me to my role at the Center for Green Politics, where the person who sat next to me at that first coffee is now my boss. I also serve as the co-spokesperson for the Federation of Young European Greens (FYEG). My focus has shifted toward systemic change, specifically regarding housing, antimilitarism, and radical democracy, but it all still goes back to that original spark: the desire for a space where we are free to express our thoughts and self-determine our future”
Reflections on the year since the Novi Sad train station collapse
Andrej describes the past year as emotional and cathartic, noting that the tragedy turned the lives of activists upside down. He highlights a shift in the political atmosphere: Serbia has moved from a “hybrid regime” to a state where activists are openly tracked and harassed online and offline. He mentions that the news cycle is so relentless (so much is happening) that what would be a major international story elsewhere is often pushed aside by new local crises in Serbia
“For me, commemorating this with the diaspora in Brussels was one of the most emotional and cathartic parts of the year. We have moved to a feeling where we know activists are being tracked online and offline, and people are being threatened at their place of work. The most overwhelming feeling is that there have been weeks that feel like years because of this news cycle. You go home after a protest and just look through Instagram stories, questioning if everyone is okay, knowing that some of your friends did not make it home because they’ve been detained”
The Youth movement in Serbia
Andrej identifies the current Serbian student movement as part of a global “Gen Z wave” seen in places like Nepal and Bangladesh. He notes that while different generations share a common goal, their methods and internal criticisms differ.
“We want to take back our future. On the street, I might have a monarchist, or a communist next to me, but we agree on one thing: we want the freedom to express our thoughts in a democratic space. My parents’ generation is more reserved and self-critical about how we organize, but they stand full force behind the youth-led movement for democratization. Even the veterans of the 90s are ever-present, but they believe the drive must come from the youth who will actually live through the future.”
How would you describe the political landscape in Serbia right now?
He describes a domestic political scene that is paralyzed by extreme fragmentation and deep existential polarization:
“Our parliamentary opposition is as fragmented. I think we have the same amount of opposition parties as the Netherlands’, which makes it impossible to build a united front. This is why the student movement decided to go strictly non-party and non-NGO—to reject any ideological coloring. In Serbia, an opposition activist and a pro-government person cannot even be in the same room anymore. It is no longer just an ideological divide; it is an existential one. If we divide ourselves further, there will be no one to stand up for us or provide legal assistance when we are in jail.”
What are your thoughts on the EU-enlargement approach towards the western Balkan?
When talking about geopolitics and international relations. Andrej states that the Green Party in Serbia are the only party explicitly calling for sanctions against Russia and full support for Ukraine. He notes that the 300,000 Russians who moved to Belgrade since the invasion have become spokespeople against Putin.
Andrej is critical of the EU, arguing that it treats Serbia as a “raw minerals deposit” (lithium) or a corridor rather than a value-based partner. He criticizes EU-officials like Ursula von der Leyen for engaging only with the “dictator” (Vučić) while ignoring the democratic opposition.
“But I think for us, it’s very important that we allow Serbia to be detached. We just want the people of Serbia to be free and do their own thing. This is what the student movement has said: detach Serbia from Russia, from China, from EU, from America, for a while, let it do its own thing, figure out where it wants to go. Then, when the new government is formed in this ideologically of free and fair elections, then we can see who our partners are, you know, because, yes, a lot of people are pro-EU, but they believe that the EU has been very stern towards us in the sense that it’s been unfair. It’s been collaborating with Vučić and the Serbian Progressive Party government.
The EU has been active, advocating for its own interests. And in the other way, Russia has been advocating for its own interests, but it’s been in some regards way better at ideological support, because it focuses on the wrongdoings of Europe. A big example is the bombings in the 90s by the NATO. Russia is using this as an example said, oh, but Europe has bombed you in the 90s. And now it is advocating and telling you what to do.
Despite these flaws, he remains pro-EU and argues that being anti-EU prevents Serbia from having a seat at the table where its future is decided.
“I want Ursula von der Leyen to speak with the democratic opposition and students, not just the dictator. Despite this, I am pro-EU because we need leverage of the far right, because being anti-EU doesn’t allow us to debate as equals; it just lets the far-right dictate the narrative.”
Are you familiar with the concept of ‘neo-idealism’? Does it appeal to you? What would a neo-idealist EU enlargement policy look like?
Geopolitical analyst Benjamin Tallis introduced the concept of neo-idealism in 2022 to describe an emerging, values-driven approach to European geopolitics, most visibly articulated by President Volodymyr Zelensky and several Central and Eastern European leaders. Neo-idealism stands in sharp contrast to classical geopolitical realism, which prioritizes power politics and accepts spheres of influence in which great powers, such as Russia, exercise authority over smaller states.
According to Tallis, neo-idealists advance a geopolitical vision in which security and strategic interests are explicitly embedded within a normative framework. Rather than focusing solely on national survival or regional stability, they articulate a broader narrative of Europe as a political community that actively defends its core values, particularly democracy, human rights, self-determination, and the (international) rule of law. In this sense, neo-idealism does not reject geopolitics but seeks to reconcile power with principle by treating values as a strategic asset rather than a liability.
Neo-Idealism can therefore be understood as a morally based approach to geopolitics, grounded in the power of values conceived as ideals to strive for: human rights, fundamental freedoms and the right of citizens in those societies to a hopeful future. These are not only ethical principles but important sources of political legitimacy and long-term stability.
He believes the student movement embodies neo-idealist values by demanding the right to self-determine without the heavy-handed influence of major powers like Russia, China, or the US
Although he supports this, he also recognizes the difficulty of this approach, noting that countries like Serbia must work with non-democratic neighbors like Turkey to avoid self-isolation.
From his perspective, a neo-idealist EU enlargement policy would be a significant departure from what he describes as the current transactional approach. The EU will have to hold a mirror to itself and move away from a model of “ethereal big men” (top-down leadership) toward a grassroots approach engaging with civil society and local leadership.
This also works with targeted sanctions against specific Serbian leaders like Vučić or Ana Brnabić, the president of the National Assembly of Serbia, who act as “vectors” for an authoritarian regime, rather than punishing the entire population.
Lithium Mining and Green Politics
Lithium mining in Serbia has become controversial due to its central role in the European Union’s green transition and the involvement of the multinational mining company Rio Tinto. Through its proposed Jadar project in western Serbia, Rio Tinto aimed to extract lithium from the mineral jadarite. For the EU, domestic or nearby lithium sourcing is strategically important to reduce dependence on imports particularly from China and to secure raw materials essential for electrification and decarbonization under initiatives such as the Critical Raw Materials Act.
However, the project has sparked widespread opposition within Serbia. Environmental activists, local communities, and green political actors argue that lithium extraction would cause severe ecological damage, including risks to water sources, agricultural land in a region heavily dependent on farming. The proposed lithium project is a major point of contention, which Andrej views through the lens of ecological and economic injustice.
He labels the lithium mining project a “catastrophe” and a form of colonialism. He points out a sharp paradox: the EU wants Serbian lithium for electric cars that the average Serbian, who still often heats their home with wood, cannot afford. He advocates for a bottom-up green transition that focuses on energy independence and participatory approaches, where companies get to focus on how locals heat their homes and actually speak with the farmers whose land is at stake.
Due to the amount of discontent and backlash form the Serbian people and environmentalist, Rio Tinto decided to suspend this mining project. This, however, does not mean that the EU’s interest in this mineral in Serbia has ended.
What are your hopes for the future?
When asked about his dream for Serbia in 2050. He shared his vision. Andrej’s vision is a free Serbia where the ruling party is separated from the state. He wants a country where civil servants are not blackmailed into party loyalty and where Serbia is an equal partner in the Balkan region.
The rest of Europe can definitely learn a lot from the youth movement in Serbia. Do you have a message for the Dutch youth?
“My message to you is self-organize. Find allies in your enemies and agree on a few key things. Don’t tie yourselves to individual personalities. Europe needs to stop pretending its version of democracy is the only standard and start learning from the ‘burgeoning democracies’ of the Global South.”
So, be less Eurocentric: “I’m very excited looking at the presidential election in Kenya, I’m very excited looking at the situation in Madagascar. In general, I think there’s a lot of exciting things, and Europe needs to start learning from these budgeting democracies, stop pretending like democracy that is from Europe is the most valid way always, and start to implement this in your whole narrative.”
Andrej Zlatović co-spokesperson for the Federation of Young European Greens (FYEG)
