Serbia closed 2025 facing continuing political tension, economic headwinds and a complicated relationship with the European Union, as President Aleksandar Vučić’s long‑standing rule was tested by public discontent and student‑led protests that marked the year.
Political unrest that began in late 2024 after the catastrophic collapse of a railway station canopy in Novi Sad, which killed 16 people, spilled into 2025 and became the largest protest movement in years. Demonstrations, initially led by university students and supported by wider civil society, challenged government accountability, corruption and institutional transparency.
Protesters accused authorities of suppressing dissent and pressuring academic institutions, leading to rallies in towns such as Novi Pazar, where students demanded resignations of university boards and senior officials. Critics also targeted President Vučić’s administration over perceived corruption and restrictions on media freedom.
Amid the unrest, the government faced political pressure and criticism but kept power. While the prime minister and several officials resigned under pressure earlier in the year, Vučić and his Serbian Progressive Party (SNS) remained dominant. The ruling camp continued to command parliamentary majorities and push through key budgetary and economic measures, including adopting the 2026 budget with a fiscal deficit target within planned limits.
Economically, Serbia navigated a challenging environment. Growth slowed amid global trade uncertainties, geopolitical tensions and sanctions affecting key sectors, including the Russian‑linked oil company NIS, which has been negotiating a sale of its Russian-owned stake to Hungary’s MOL amid sanctions that have disrupted crude supplies.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) continued to back Belgrade’s reform efforts, concluding successive reviews under a multi‑year Policy Coordination Instrument that aimed to reinforce fiscal discipline, structural reforms and resilience to shocks.
Environmental pressures also affected rural communities, with prolonged drought and water shortages harming livestock and agriculture, particularly in southeastern regions.
On foreign policy, Serbia continued to pursue membership in the European Union, but alignment with EU foreign policy — particularly sanctions on Russia — remained limited, complicating accession efforts. Relations with NATO and Western partners were cautious, even as Belgrade maintained strong ties with Moscow and expressed interest in balancing its international relations.
The year ended with Serbia’s civic space facing criticism from rights groups, which flagged restrictions on fundamental freedoms as authorities clamped down on protests and civil society activism.
As 2026 begins, Serbia confronts the challenge of sustaining economic momentum, addressing public dissatisfaction and maintaining political stability under a leadership that continues to centralise power while navigating a delicate path between East and West.