ljubica gojgic

Let me clarify a few things for @AndrejPlenkovic who seems increasingly concerned about the foreign policy direction of Serbia’s incoming government. Mr Plenković is correct that the Student List did not devote much attention to foreign policy during its election campaign. Perhaps this was, at least in part, a strategic decision. However, the far more important explanation lies in the depth and severity of Serbia’s domestic political crisis, the consequences of which millions of Serbian citizens have experienced first-hand, often on a daily basis. For nearly two years, people across Serbia protested against corruption, state capture, political violence and the erosion of the rule of law. Their priority was to restore democratic institutions and remove a government that had systematically undermined them. But that is where my agreement with Mr Plenković ends. First, the students may not have spoken extensively about foreign policy, but, I would argue that their actions were hardly devoid of political signals. They ran an ultramarathon of nearly 2,000 kilometres to Brussels and cycled some 1,400 kilometres to Strasbourg. Not Moscow. Not Beijing. Throughout their protests, they sought dialogue with European institutions, met with EU officials and appealed to European political leaders to support their demands for democracy, accountability and the rule of law. In many cases, those European leaders who are now disappointed by a lack of EU flags, have chosen to turn a blind eye to serious democratic backsliding taking place in Serbia. Second, Mr Plenković suggests that the students must now explain what they stand for. I am not entirely sure whether the Croatian Prime Minister is genuinely uninformed or simply choosing to omit some rather important context. Ilija Srdanović, the lead candidate on the Student List, has already stated unequivocally that Serbia will continue its European integration process. He has also made clear that the incoming government intends to pursue reforms concerning the rule of law, institutional independence, media freedom and the fight against corruption: all of which matter for Serbia’s accession to the bloc. Third, regarding Mr Plenković’s apparent fascination with the absence of EU flags during the election celebrations. These protests were about domestic political developments in Serbia. So was the election campaign. They were not protests about joining the EU, nor was the election a referendum on European integration. And since Mr Plenković appears so concerned with what the presence or absence of certain symbols reveals about a country's political direction, perhaps he would do well to look a little closer to home. Because while he is busy counting EU flags at Serbian election celebrations, the Ustaša salute "Za dom spremni" has become an increasingly visible feature of nationalist gatherings in Croatia. This is not an isolated phenomenon: just last month, members of Torcida marched through Split chanting "Auschwitz", "Rise up, Adolf" and "Let's go, Ustaše". Let me be clear: I do not believe that this extremist ideology is representative of Croatia or its people. However, its growing normalisation under Mr Plenković’s leadership is deeply concerning, particularly given his apparent willingness to flirt with it, as demonstrated by his meeting with Thompson ahead of his concert, whenever it serves his political interests. All this while his own party has been plagued by corruption scandals. Perhaps, then, Mr Plenković should be considerably less concerned about the number of EU flags at Serbian election celebrations and far more concerned about developments in his own country. The lesson he should take from Serbia is that even leaders who appear untouchable can be removed by citizens who have simply had enough. Vučić learned that lesson at the ballot box. Mr Plenković would do well to remember it.