In a strategic pivot, Serbian President Aleksandar Vučić has responded to nine months of persistent anti-government protests not with the anticipated crackdown or a call for new elections, but with a sweeping economic support package. This move is a calculated gamble to defuse public anger and consolidate his power by addressing economic anxieties rather than political demands.
At a press conference, Vučić detailed his plan to combat inflation and improve living standards, which he framed as the “decisive measures” he had previously promised. The package, set to take effect on September 1, includes capping retail markups on thousands of products, reducing loan interest rates, and increasing subsidies on electricity and firewood for vulnerable populations such as pensioners and low-income families. Furthermore, the government aims to amend laws to protect debtors from losing their primary residence.
These economic incentives are a direct answer to a protest movement that has gained significant momentum. The demonstrations were initially fueled by allegations of widespread corruption and were tragically reignited in November 2024 after a newly renovated railway station roof collapsed in Novi Sad, killing 16 people and spotlighting concerns over graft in public projects. The core demand of the protesters has been Vučić’s resignation.
By rolling out this populist economic agenda, President Vučić is attempting to reframe the national conversation, shifting the focus from his lengthy tenure and alleged corruption to his role as a provider of stability and prosperity. This narrative is potent in a country that has seen record-low unemployment and a steady flow of foreign investment under his leadership. His supporters have already taken to the streets in pro-government rallies, holding signs that champion stability over the disruption of blockades.
This strategy puts the political opposition in a difficult position. Their platform is primarily focused on the singular demand for Vučić’s removal, lacking a comprehensive alternative vision. They cannot effectively leverage a pro-European agenda, as Vučić himself publicly supports Serbia’s EU integration and has successfully maintained a working relationship with Brussels, accusing his opponents of jeopardizing this path through chaos.
The European Union’s cautious stance further strengthens Vučić’s position. The EU ambassador’s recent call for all political forces to “reduce tensions” has been interpreted as a veiled preference for the incumbent’s stability over the opposition’s unpredictable challenge. This implicit endorsement from Brussels provides Vučić with significant political cover both at home and abroad.
While the situation currently appears to favor the president, it remains uncertain whether economic relief alone will be enough to quell the protests. The deep-seated grievances over corruption and governance that drove people into the streets are unlikely to disappear. Vučić’s gambit may shore up his support base, but the enduring protest movement signals that a significant segment of the Serbian population desires more than just economic handouts.