In an exclusive interview with the European Center for PopulismStudies (ECPS), Professor Florian Bieber, Professor of Southeast European History and Politics at the University of Graz, warns that Serbia’s democratic breakthrough risks repeating the failures of its post-2000 transition unless entrenched authoritarian networks are dismantled. Following the Students’ List’s electoral defeat of Aleksandar Vučić, Professor Bieber emphasizes the need to restore judicial independence, reform security structures, establish genuine media pluralism, and prevent socioeconomic exclusion. Drawing parallels with the aftermath of Slobodan Milošević’s overthrow, he argues that electoral victory alone cannot guarantee democratic consolidation. The challenge, he stresses, is to transform student-led civic mobilization into durable democratic institutions while ensuring that supporters of the defeated regime are not politically marginalized.
Interview by Selcuk Gultasli
Serbia stands at a historic turning point. Following nearly two years of student-led protests against corruption, institutional capture, and Aleksandar Vučić’s personalized authoritarianism, the Students’ List secured a parliamentary majority in October 2026. Yet electoral victory raises fundamental questions about dismantling entrenched clientelist networks, restoring democratic institutions, and sustaining inclusive civic mobilization. Serbia’s experience also offers broader insights into the vulnerabilities of competitive authoritarian regimes.
In an in-depth interview with the European Center for Populism Studies (ECPS), Professor Florian Bieber, Professor of Southeast European History and Politics at the University of Graz and Director of its Centre for Southeast European Studies, examines Serbia’s democratic breakthrough through the historical failures of its post-Milošević transition. His central warning is that removing an authoritarian incumbent does not necessarily dismantle the structures that sustained authoritarian rule.
Reflecting on October 2000, Professor Bieber recalls that Serbia never experienced a decisive institutional rupture: “Many of the power holders from the previous regime managed to survive through these negotiations.” The failure to investigate entrenched political, security, and business networks enabled their continued influence and ultimately facilitated democratic reversal. He therefore emphasizes that “this kind of rupture with the previous institutional structures is critical.”
The Students’ List, Professor Bieber argues, now enjoys an important advantage: “It won an outright majority and did not have to make compromises to win the elections.” Unlike established parties, it carries fewer inherited political obligations. Nevertheless, reforming captured institutions remains exceptionally difficult. He identifies the judiciary as perhaps the greatest challenge, stressing the importance of “ensuring that it remains vigilant and that nobody is above the law.”Security structures, patronage networks, and politically dependent media present equally consequential obstacles.
Professor Bieber also warns against repeating the socioeconomic exclusions that undermined democratization after 2000. Citizens who experienced unemployment, poverty, and disillusionment became receptive to renewed authoritarian politics. Accordingly, he argues that those who supported Vučić’s Progressive Party must not be forgotten but instead “brought on board,” lest they become the constituency for another authoritarian resurgence.
Beyond institutional reform, the interview explores the students’ innovative horizontal organization, cross-ethnic solidarity, and prospects for European integration. Professor Bieber highlights their insistence that “We want institutions; we don’t want individuals,” while questioning how participatory practices can coexist with effective representative government.
Ultimately, Serbia’s experience offers lessons extending beyond the Western Balkans. As Professor Bieber observes, “There is no single path out of competitive authoritarian regimes.” What successful transitions share, however, is ideologically broad coalitions and sustained civic mobilization. The challenge now is transforming electoral victory into durable democratic institutions without reproducing the political exclusions and structural vulnerabilities of the past.
