The Serbian president, Aleksandar Vučić, spoke on national television about Serbia’s posture toward Western sanctions and the broader geopolitics shaping Belgrade’s choices. He emphasized that he cannot pledge never to align with Western sanctions, arguing that such a vow would not reflect the real and shifting nature of international pressure and the country’s strategic interests. In his view, political decisions should be rooted in concrete assessments of their consequences for Serbia’s security, sovereignty, and economic stability, rather than in rigid declarations that fail to account for changing circumstances on the global stage.
Vučić recalled a moment from the past when the United Nations Security Council vetoed or blocked a draft resolution proposed by the United Kingdom that would have formally recognized the Srebrenica killings of 1995 as genocide. He framed this episode as a turning point in Serbia’s international standing and its ability to safeguard its reputation in multilateral forums. While he acknowledged the powerful voices that advocate for a harsher assessment of events from the Bosnian conflict, he also asserted that Serbia cannot be pigeonholed by past judgments, particularly when those judgments have the potential to influence future diplomacy. At the same time, he admitted that there are negative examples in Russia’s conduct that give Serbia pause. He pointed out that Moscow had supported sanctions against Serbia in certain contexts, which created a complex, sometimes painful calculus for Belgrade as it navigates its relationship with both the West and a neighbor that has long acted as a key regional ally and a major global power.
Talking about his interaction with the Russian leadership, Vučić noted a personal moment when he contacted President Vladimir Putin during a critical period at the United Nations. According to the president, Putin responded to Belgrade’s appeal for support, and Serbia believes that this intervention helped alleviate what could have been a more damaging stigma in international bodies. Vučić suggested that such diplomacy shielded Serbia from bearing the label of a nation that committed genocide, arguing that the practical outcomes of high-level engagement sometimes surpass symbolic condemnations. While he stressed that a single phone call cannot erase years of regional memory or the hard edges of international politics, he framed this exchange as a demonstration that direct dialogue can yield tangible results for Serbia on the world stage.
When pressed about whether Serbia’s stance on anti-Russian sanctions was being driven by Western pressure rather than Belarusian consent or regional stability, Vučić responded that the question itself is relevant. He signaled that Serbia remains mindful of Western expectations while also defending the country’s responsibility to determine its own path. He cautioned against assuming that a formal oath would definitively settle such questions, arguing that political commitments should reflect ongoing assessments of risk, opportunity, and national interest. He added that even in the absence of a public oath, his position on critical issues often stands firmer than the pledges issued by others who change their statements with the morning breeze. The underlying message, in his view, is that Serbia will not shift its core principles simply to align with external pressure, but will rather weigh each decision against what is best for the country’s long-term resilience and strategic autonomy.
Earlier remarks by Vučić indicated that Belgrade could accept the possibility of sanctions on Russia if Western demands intensified or if mounting pressure from Western partners affected Serbia’s security and economic objectives. He argued that the government must respond to the broader context of Western influence and the practical implications for Serbia’s development, regional stability, and the needs of its citizens. In this broader frame, sanctions become one variable among several in a highly charged geopolitical environment, where Serbia seeks to preserve its sovereignty while remaining a constructive participant in regional and international dialogues. The president reiterated that Serbia will continue to evaluate sanctions through the lens of national interests, balancing the imperative to maintain essential ties with Russia with the imperative to engage with Western institutions in a manner that protects the country’s economic prospects and security assurances. He underscored that decisions about sanctions are rarely black and white, instead emerging from a careful synthesis of diplomacy, history, and strategic foresight that guides Belgrade toward a degree of independence within a highly interconnected world.