Hungary – Serbia – Belarus?

• 2.11.2026, 9:59

Russia is a dwarf compared to NATO

In Serbia, historic events took place. After nearly two years of protests, pro-Russian politician Aleksandar Vučić lost the parliamentary election to the “Student List.” The police sided with the people, and journalists from the regional public television station apologized for years of one-sided reporting.

Can the events in Serbia be called a “velvet revolution” and a victory for nonviolent resistance?

The website Charter97.org discussed this with former political prisoner and coordinator of the “European Belarus” civic campaign, Yevgeny Afnagel:
— This is an example of victory of a nonviolent velvet revolution, especially given the information that emerged after the election. Let me remind you that several Serbian and European sources reported that Vučić was planning a military coup. Additional troops were deployed to Belgrade.

The Serbian opposition prevented this scenario by demonstrating strength and resolve. Vucic was ready to carry out a military coup with Russia’s support, but some members of the military opposed it and remained loyal to the Constitution.

— What was the main factor behind the protests’ success?

— The protests didn’t start yesterday or the day before. The October 25 election marked the culmination of a long campaign of nonviolent resistance that began two years ago, following the tragedy in Novi Sad. At that time, as you may recall, the roof of the train station collapsed, killing people. Corruption and the authorities’ irresponsibility were among the causes of the tragedy. This trigger transformed latent discontent and kitchen-table conversations into a powerful and organized force.

After that, university blockades and street demonstrations began. It became clear that the government was incapable of handling crisis situations. In March 2025, Belgrade saw one of the largest protest marches, when hundreds of thousands of people took to the streets.

It was clear that the opposition leaders were well versed in the history of resistance over the past decades. They drew on the experience of “Otpor” and employed tools of nonviolent resistance that had proven effective in other countries.

The second factor: the opposition consistently demonstrated strength, determination, and principle; it changed tactics when necessary but never wavered from its main demand: “Vucic must go.”
The third factor is the leaders. Note: The “Student List” is made up of very different people. Ilija Srdanović—a professor at the medical school and a cardiologist, Deyan Šoškić—an economist and former head of the National Bank; actor Tihomir Stanić; and Yugoslav basketball legend Deyan Bodiroga. They were not politicians, but ordinary citizens of the country who were concerned about its future.

I’d like to draw parallels with Belarus.

For many newcomers, our revolution happened completely by chance and began in the summer of 2020. In reality, it was sparked by the protests organized by the Belarusian National Congress in 2017, which brought thousands upon thousands of angry Belarusians across the country out onto the streets to protest the notorious “decree on parasites”. It was then that regional bloggers also made their voices heard loud and clear. The Belarusian revolution—which became the largest in Europe in the 21st century—was prepared by experienced resistance leaders from “European Belarus,” “Narodnaya Gramada,” and a host of other parties and organizations, while it gained new momentum from those who sensed the public’s protest sentiment and took the risk of participating in the presidential campaign.

— Which tactics of nonviolent resistance used by the Serbian opposition and the student movement proved decisive for victory? How did they manage to unite society and turn the protest into a political outcome?

— I would say the key factors in Serbia were the university blockades and sit-in strikes in 2025. Students and factory workers didn’t just call a strike. They turned their workplace or university into a “territory of freedom” and wouldn’t let their opponents enter.

At one point, there were a great many such centers in Serbia. The authorities simply didn’t know what to do about them. It’s one thing when people go on strike, don’t go to work, and stay at home. It’s another when opposition symbols and flags fly over universities and factories, appear in the city center, and everyone sees them.

Dozens of other methods were used: boycotts, peaceful street protests and performances, moments of silence, symbolic 15-minute traffic stoppages, blockades of bridges and state-owned enterprises, marches between cities, and refusal to cooperate. In this way, every supporter of change found a place for themselves and an opportunity to contribute to the common cause.

— What can Belarusians learn from Serbia’s experience for a future victory over Lukashenko’s dictatorship?

— The Serbs already overthrew a dictator—Milošević—in 2000. The student resistance movement “Otpor” played a decisive role in those events, and democratic parties came to power. However, a few years later, the government was led by Milošević’s former allies, members of Šešelj’s Serbian Radical Party. Vučić, who ruled Serbia as an autocrat for more than 12 years, had previously served as general secretary of Šešelj’s party.

Yes, as one of the leaders of the Belarusian “Zubr” movement—which was the largest in Belarus in the early 2000s—I can say that we learned a great deal from “Otpor.” But the Belarusian experience was also in demand. Few people know that before the “Orange Revolution” in Ukraine, we, together with the Serbs, shared our experience with activists from “Pora,” which later played a huge role in the first Maidan. The experience of “Zubr” and “Otpor” was also utilized by the leaders of the Georgian “Kmara” during the “Rose Revolution” in Tbilisi.

Revolutions and the struggle for freedom in authoritarian countries cannot be viewed in isolation. They always have a huge impact on neighboring countries. The first Ukrainian Maidan served as an example for Minsk’s 2006 Square, and the Belarusian protests in 2010 influenced the “Arab Spring.” Now Belarusians are looking with hope toward Hungary, Serbia, and, of course, Ukraine.

I am confident that the successes of the forces of good in these countries will also influence what is happening in Belarus, and Europe will become a continent free of dictatorships.

But I would like to return to where it all began in Serbia. On the surface, everything in the country seems “stable”; the economy appears to be functioning; wages are higher than in Albania; and state-run and some independent media outlets claim that things aren’t really that bad in the country and try to convince people of the opposition’s weakness. But then some event occurs, and the illusion crumbles, and everything is set in motion.

The discontent that has been building up in kitchens, student dorms, and factory break rooms spills out onto the streets in a matter of just a few days or weeks. And hundreds of thousands of people take to the streets to protest.

That’s exactly what happened in our country in 2020. Recall the words of most “independent political analysts” and foreign “useful idiots” about the “popular Lukashenko” and how we were in for “the most boring election.” Note that they’re saying the exact same thing now, having forgotten how badly they were proven wrong in 2020.

Yes, Russian aggression against Ukraine is a very serious factor in our region. But Putin’s Russia is an economic and military dwarf compared to the European Union and, even more so, to NATO. Recall the statement by our fellow countryman—American General Grinkevich—that so terrified the collective farm dictator.

We know how much Belarusians hate Lukashenko, dream of change, and look back on 2020. It’s impossible to stay in power for long when the overwhelming majority of the population is against you. Any minor incident, any failure by the authorities, could be the trigger that sets in motion a process of fundamental change in Belarus. It could happen as early as tomorrow.