Shapes in search of substance - Ditmir Bushati, August 2026

His paradox — that lightness, far from liberating, can become unbearable — describes with precision the context in which Ukrainian President Zelenskyy's visit to Serbia took place. And this lightness has become a burden in itself, because of the gap between what it is perceived to promise and what reality offers. Thereby deepening the crisis of trust.

Accustomed to this political reality for a long time now, I did not expect the Ukrainian president's visit to Belgrade to mark a turn in Serbia's foreign policy towards the West. The only surprise was the lack of empathy and of any expression of gratitude on the part of the president of a country at war towards partners in Southeast Europe, including Kosovo, who have stood by Ukraine's side since the first day of the war.

Ukraine's desire for normal relations with Serbia — Russia's closest ally after Belarus, and China's closest partner in Southeast Europe — is understandable. Ukraine claims that China can exert pressure on Russia to bring the war to an end. Meanwhile, during the war, Ukraine has bought armaments from Serbia through third-party intermediaries.

Seen in this context, the importance of the Ukrainian president's visit to Serbia cannot be measured only by the number of documents signed. Its weight lies in what was said, but perhaps even more in what remained unsaid. His visit to a country that is a candidate for EU membership, but which continues to refuse to impose sanctions on Russia, constituted an event of symbolic weight.

The way the visit was organised brought out its many dimensions. Unlike other heads of state who have visited Serbia, Zelenskyy was not met at the airport by his counterpart Vučić, but by the minister of energy, emphasising from the very beginning the economic and energy aspect of the visit.

The security and military components, potentially the more sensitive ones, remained in the background. During the press conference, Vučić tried to avoid the topic of military cooperation as much as possible, leaving the door open for such cooperation after the end of the Russia-Ukraine war.

The discussion on the possible joint production of drones showed how delicate this issue is. In recent years Serbia has cultivated close relations with Israel, including the opening of a factory for the production of drones. Serbia also enjoys warm relations with Iran, which is at war with Israel. Iran supplies Russia with combat drones. Meanwhile, Israel refuses to offer Ukraine military assistance of this level, because it does not wish to damage relations with Russia, even though it knows that Russia offers critical military intelligence to Iran.

Vučić's categorical denial regarding the opening of a joint factory with the Ukrainians for the production of drones comes as a result of the above situation, which presents a number of unknowns. At the press conference Vučić dispelled every shadow of doubt about a military alignment of Belgrade with Kyiv.

Another element of the visit was the question of European integration. Because of the war, Ukraine has advanced in the EU accession process, unlike Serbia, which has remained at a standstill. Beyond the understanding on concluding a free trade agreement, which is expected to be realised by the end of the year, and cooperation in the fields of energy, infrastructure, agriculture and the reconstruction process of Ukraine, for President Vučić the European dimension of this visit was important.

Let us be clear, his aim is not Serbia's membership in the EU, which would imply genuine reforms in the field of the rule of law, normalisation of relations and mutual recognition with Kosovo, a new dynamic with the neighbours in the region and geopolitical alignment, but rather the untouchability of a power that has been considerably shaken by the wave of student protests across the country.

A few weeks before the early parliamentary elections in Serbia, in which Vučić aims to return to the post of prime minister, it is important for him to show European partners that he is ready to cooperate with Kyiv, and that he remains a factor of cooperation with the West, regardless of his fluctuations and his flirtations with other powers.

Although the Ukrainian president's visit was intended mainly for the international audience, it brought to light the continuation of Vučić's many years of chameleon-like play, wrapped in the guise of a multi-vector foreign policy. He made it known that Belgrade will not change its position regarding the imposition of sanctions on Russia.

Russia's reaction was restrained, which confirms that Moscow is aware of the style of Vučić's politics, attaching more importance to Serbia's concrete moves than to diplomatic phrases. This past November, the spokeswoman of Russia's ministry of foreign affairs posed the question of whether there is one President Vučić or whether different people give his interviews, because of the differing statements in different capitals, depending on the audience.

Vučić showed the West his readiness for cooperation with Kyiv, without changing his positions and his relations with Moscow. This can be described more as a change of tone than as a change of strategy. Serbia stands in the same position as it has since the beginning of the war: it supports Ukraine's territorial integrity, but does not join the West's sanctions against Russia. In short, Vučić gave a signal to Brussels, but at the same time does not accept the EU's main demands on Serbia.

Beyond the symbolism of a diplomatic debut in a country allied with Russia, it is difficult to say what Zelenskyy achieved with this visit. Naturally, the lowest point of this visit will remain his stance towards Kosovo and his alignment with the aggressor and not the victim.

If there is no movement towards substance and everything remains within the framework of form, this visit will be mortgaged as a balancing act by Vučić in foreign policy, at a difficult political moment for him. At present, it can be said that this is not a step towards the West on Serbia's part, but rather an attempt to preserve as much room for manoeuvre as possible in the changed European circumstances.

And how much longer will the international environment allow Serbia to postpone the taking of this decision? The answer to this question is to be found in Kundera's novel. He makes clear to us that life acquires meaning only when we accept the weight, when the choices we make carry consequences. This is just as true in politics.

About the Author

Ditmir Bushati, former Minister for Europe and Foreign Affairs, former Member of the Albanian Parliament.

The opinions, conclusions, and recommendations expressed in this publication do not necessarily reflect those of the Friedrich Ebert Foundation or the organizations the authors work for.