In an interview with the ECPS, Professor Dušan Spasojević of the University of Belgrade examines Serbia’s student-led electoral victory and the challenges of democratic consolidation following Aleksandar Vučić’s defeat. While mass mobilization and civic solidarity helped overcome the structural advantages of competitive authoritarianism, Professor Spasojević cautions that entrenched political divisions, Serbian nationalism, and ethnonational tensions persist. He highlights the difficulties of maintaining unity within the ideologically diverse Students’ List and rebuilding democratic institutions. Drawing lessons from Milošević’s overthrow in 2000, he warns that without lustration and accountability, former authoritarian elites may return sooner than expected. Judicial independence, media freedom, and effective enforcement of existing laws, he argues, are essential to preventing renewed authoritarianism.
Interview by Selcuk Gultasli
Serbia’s October 25, 2026, parliamentary elections marked a historic political turning point, with the student-backed Students’ List securing 140 of 250 seats and ending Aleksandar Vučić’s longstanding political dominance. Emerging from protests following the November 2024 Novi Sad railway station tragedy, the movement transformed demands for accountability into a nationwide challenge to institutional capture, political clientelism, and personalized rule. Yet electoral victory raises profound questions about democratic consolidation, institutional reform, and the resilience of entrenched authoritarian networks.
In this interview with the European Center for Populism Studies (ECPS), Professor Dušan Spasojević, Professor of Political Science at the University of Belgrade, offers a nuanced assessment of Serbia’s democratic breakthrough, highlighting both the transformative power of student-led mobilization and the formidable obstacles confronting democratic renewal.
Drawing parallels with Slobodan Milošević’s overthrow in 2000, Professor Spasojević identifies transitional justice as a decisive test. Warning against the complacency that characterized Serbia’s earlier transition, he argues: “If we fail to carry out lustration or establish some form of accountability, they will return, and sooner than we might expect.” Indeed, he cautions that “the return of the previous regime might be even easier now than it was in 2000.” His central recommendation is to prioritize accountability, judicial independence, media freedom, and implementation of existing laws.
Yet Professor Spasojević emphasizes that electoral victory has not erased Serbia’s deep political divisions. Although student mobilization attracted previously disengaged citizens and former government supporters, entrenched urban–rural and socioeconomic cleavages persist. Moreover, the Students’ List encompasses ideological positions ranging from the far right to the far left. Consequently, “Maintaining that unity will be a key challenge for the new government and the list itself.”
The interview also illuminates how mass mobilization can challenge competitive authoritarianism. Through nationwide canvassing, citizen participation, and election monitoring, students countered the ruling party’s institutional advantages. As Professor Spasojević observes, “the elections were ultimately neither free nor fair, but they were sufficiently competitive to make victory possible.”
Importantly, the movement’s anti-authoritarian success did not necessarily entail an ideological rupture with Serbian nationalism. Professor Spasojević argues that students “didn’t challenge Serbian nationalism,” pointing to their ambiguous positions on Kosovo, Russia, and European integration. Similarly, while solidarity between Serbian and Bosniak students represented meaningful civic progress, entrenched ethnonational divisions remain. The movement’s silence surrounding Srebrenica and the limited public participation of Albanian students illustrate the constraints of reconciliation through mobilization alone.
Professor Spasojević’s analysis distinguishes electoral transformation from democratic consolidation. Serbia’s experience demonstrates the importance of solidarity and collective action, but also the necessity of dismantling authoritarian structures. His overarching warning is unequivocal: “Democracy should never be taken for granted,” even after authoritarian incumbents lose power.
