“Only truth and justice” — these were the demands the student protesters presented to the Serbian authorities eight months ago in the wake of the collapse of the canopy at the entrance to Novi Sad railway station on November 1 that killed 16 people.
United under the slogan “You’ve got blood on your hands,” they rejected leaders, ideologies and parties alike, demanding only accountability for the deaths of those killed in the tragedy.
“We had a minimal ideological consensus around which we united,” says Tatjana Rasic, a student from Novi Sad who joined the protests at a very early stage.
“We were not asked to express views on other issues, and we followed general democratic principles — unity, tolerance, justice,” she told DW.
Change within the movement
Right from the word go, the flags of Serbia and the universities were the only ones welcome at the students’ protests. It was an attempt to return state symbols to the citizens rather than let them become tools of politics.
But as the protest movement grew, so, too did the ideological diversity within it.
Flags bearing slogans like “We won’t give up Kosovo,” traditional Serbian caps and nationalist symbols began popping up at protests with increasing frequency. At the same time, veterans of the Yugoslav wars of the 1990s often came to demonstrations and acted as “security guards” for the students.
A platform for Serbian nationalism?
There was growing criticism that the protests had turned into a platform for Greater Serbian nationalism.
This criticism peaked on June 28 — Vidovdan, a national and religious holiday that is deeply rooted in Serbian national mythology. The major anti-government protest on that day was dominated by nationalist and conservative speeches, including one by Professor Milo Lompar, who is known for glorifying war criminal Radovan Karadzic.
Cultural analyst Aleksandra Djuric Bosnic told DW that such criticism comes not only from resistance to the destructive legacy of the 1990s, which were marked by the bloody Yugoslav wars and the misuse of pseudo-patriotic narratives in Serbia, but also from a fear that Serbia might slide back into ideological patterns of the past.
“For those of us who belong to the generations that were traumatized by the 1990s, the memory of Slobodan Milosevic’s Vidovdan speech at Gazimestan [in 1989] is itself traumatic,” says Djuric Bosnic.
“When added to that, on June 28, part of the speech contained formulations reminiscent of the manipulation of national sentiment in the 1990s, as well as the narratives of a unified Serbia and the Serbian world — a construct of the current regime — the culmination of these criticisms is understandable,” she says.
The will of the plenary
Responding to accusations that the student movement had veered to the right, the students point out that before every protest, they urged participants to come without party or ideological symbols, but stress that it was often impossible to control the crowd.
“Moreover, people started seeing us literally as a political movement and expected us to take a stance on the ideological spectrum. But within our organization, that is very difficult — because we have to discuss it at the plenary assembly, listen to every individual, and in the end, we were not even sure why that was demanded of us,” says Tatjana Rasic.
That is why plenary assemblies often lasted for hours, exposing deep ideological rifts among students — especially on questions of “national significance” such as the independence of Kosovo or the 1995 Srebrenica massacre.
“No matter how difficult it is for me personally to believe that someone can have a different view to me but still be part of the same struggle, we had to accept it. It became clear that there are indeed many people with different opinions,” says Rasic.
Changing youth attitudes
But despite all this, the student movement has apparently had a significant impact on young people’s attitudes.
The National Youth Council of Serbia (KOMS) conducts research into young people’s attitudes. For years, it noted high levels of political apathy among young people, their inclination toward tradition and their preference for a “strong hand” in governance.
However, preliminary 2025 data from KOMS shows changes in young people’s views on the EU and important national questions such as Kosovo.
“The biggest changes brought by the student movement relate to the way democracy is valued and understood. Today, 60% of young people believe democracy is the best form of governance, compared to 40% last year,” Milica Borjanic of KOMS told DW.
“Previously, around 60% of young people said Serbia needs a strong leader, but now, for the first time, over 50% say it does not,” says Borjanic.
Inclusiveness is the movement’s strength
Political scientist Boban Stojanovic, who has been involved in KOMS research for years, believes that those people who want the students to make ideological declarations are actually acting in bad faith.
“The only real social divide at the moment is between the government — characterized by a lack of freedom, corruption, national betrayal and absolute inequality — and a new student or political movement whose values are freedom, justice, tolerance, the fight against corruption and the protection of national interests,” says Stojanovic.
He believes that the movement’s greatest strength lies precisely in its inclusiveness. However, he also believes that without unity, the current regime cannot be defeated.
“The government knows this and is trying to sow division in the student movement over issues like their stance on the EU, Kosovo and, of course, they tried to exploit [the 30th anniversary of] Srebrenica to the fullest,” Stojanovic added.
Redefining values
Aleksandra Djuric Bosnic says that it is impossible to fundamentally change value orientations while populist autocracies hold power.
“The right time for redefining the value system will come only when Serbia becomes a democratic and lawful state again,” she says.
“Some red lines — if we truly want Serbia to become a country of free and dignified citizens — must never be crossed in that new and liberated state,” says Djuric Bosnic. “There must be no revision of history, no minimization of the crimes committed by Milosevic’s regime during the 1990s wars in the name of Serbian citizens, no absolution of war criminals, nor interference in neighboring countries’ political processes. These are fundamental ethical principles,” she added.
What the students want
The students themselves would be happiest if the focus returned to the issue that initially brought them together: justice for those who died at Novi Sad railway station last November.
Tatjana Rasic is clear about what the students want to achieve: “We want a state that functions properly, with laws and the separation of powers principle,” she says.
Rasic is also convinced that despite differences of opinion, the students are united: “I think even if I were to imagine an ideal parliament, it wouldn’t be a problem at all for it to have different viewpoints and I think our protest has been going on for that long because, despite our differences, we always return to the fundamentals from which we started,” she says.
Edited by: Aingeal Flanagan
