Serbia is becoming a kind of social dump that’s inhabited by the old and the sick, where fear and corruption are managed with the help of a system of personal authority that guarantees peace in Serbia, BiH and Montenegro without linking Serbia to Russia and China. Vučić’s deadline has not expired on that side, and the need for such a system of authority will become eternal if serbia does not come to its senses.
Any statistic is just a number, which is subject to manipulation if not put into context. The fact that Serbia has more Chinese vaccines (as a diabetic myself, I rushed to receive it, because there were no others available where I received it) can be given many mutually exclusive meanings.
This can mean that Serbia was more organised, more nimble and has more money to buy vaccines during the pandemic than the most developed countries. Admittedly, Serbia bought Chinese vaccines that are not in demand on the markets of those most developed countries. That vaccine has not yet been approved for purchase by the World Health Organization. The Agency for Medicines and Medical Devices here helped by providing an import permit, in contrast to Pfizer, which was a step higher after receiving a temporary permit.
This case simultaneously raises the question of the advantages of political systems that are based on personal power and the extent to which that is more effective during times of crisis than systems led by the rule of law and procedures. Vladimir Bilčik had no such dilemma, nor did the members of the European Parliament who showered his report with amendments like never before, although there have been previous opportunities to note that personal power exists in Serbia as a type of government that negates the rule of law, institutional integrity and freedom of the media and speech. In short, which negates the state, and only states can enter the EU, but as territories, entities with the aforementioned rule of law and, as the greatest living philosopher Jürgen Habermas said, with a developed public, without which there can be no state.
In essence, Bilčik’s report is a kind of stamp of approval on all reports and analyses produced by domestic organisations on the state of affairs, and which first began receiving confirmation from international NGOs, then the ODIHR in its report on last year’s elections, which was transcribed by the European Commission in its Progress report. And, ultimately, the United States put its stamp on everything.
Jovanjica, Krišik, Telekom and Savamala, as tangible examples of the absence of change in the state of open Chapters 23 and 24, can for this government be what 24 cases of privatisation were for the previous government
Jovanjica, Krišik, Telekom and Savamala, as tangible examples of the absence of change in the state of open chapters 23 and 24 can for this government be what 24 cases of privatisation were for the previous government.
The result of this is the departure of those who can and want to join the European Union, which Serbia seems to be fleeing from, or at least hesitating to join, becoming a kind of social dump that’s inhabited by the old and the sick, where fear and corruption are managed with the help of a system of personal authority that guarantees peace in Serbia, B-H and Montenegro without linking Serbia to Russia and China. Vučić’s deadline has not expired on that side, and the need for such a system of authority will become eternal if Serbia does not come to its senses. With the rule of law, the integrity of institutions and media freedom, the name of the administrator will become irrelevant.
What has changed in the meantime, if anything, in America’s attitude towards Serbia, and are some messages being sent through political conversation and others through investment lending, where European, Chinese and (suggested) American state money lead to infrastructural interconnections with Europe?
Media outlets that are controlled by the authorities have tried to paint a picture of the Trump administration’s fondness for Serbia. However, the Washington Agreement, as the culmination of that “change”, contributed to a state that hadn’t recognised Kosovo before that “vision” suddenly recognising Kosovo. As we are taught by Immanuel Wallerstein, the metropolis never changes its structural interests at the periphery, to which the modern Serbia belongs.
