Europe Day and Victory Day: Why is May 9 no longer a symbol of unity?

One date—until recently, the same symbolism. Since the beginning of the war in Ukraine, May 9 has become a day of division. While in Brussels, Europe Day is celebrated as a symbol of unity, in Moscow, the military parade marks the peak of Victory Day commemorations over fascism. For some, this is comical; for others, alarming. Interviewees for Kosovo Online emphasize that historical events—and even the holidays derived from them—are being used for day-to-day political purposes. They warn that such frictions and alignments have not spared the Western Balkans, especially along the Belgrade–Pristina axis.

Written by: Djordje Barovic

"We do not have the right to revise history, as a nation that suffered under the German Nazi occupiers and their local collaborators in the region who fought against the Serbian people," stated Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic upon arriving in Moscow to attend the military parade marking Victory Day over fascism.

His visit to Russia was openly criticized by EU representatives.

"I expressed concern over the Republic of Serbia’s participation in Russia’s military parade—an event that abuses history for political purposes. Let us remember sincerely and resolutely," said Germany's ambassador to Kosovo, Jörn Rohde, after the embassy in Pristina marked 80 years since the end of WWII on the eve of Victory Day.

Earlier, the advisor to Kosovo's president, Bekim Kupina, said Vucic’s attendance at the Victory Day celebrations in Moscow was "a red flag to all European representatives who support him."

"Expected panic in Pristina over President Aleksandar Vucic’s visit to Moscow. In vain do they mask their inability to form a government in Pristina with attacks on the president of Serbia," responded Petar Petkovic, director of the Office for Kosovo and Metohija, on social media platform X.

Comical Divisions

Petar Ristanovic, research associate at the Institute for Serbian Culture in Leposavic, says that the war in Ukraine has resulted in comical political divisions regarding the celebration of Europe Day and Victory Day, visible even in the Western Balkans.

"It’s somewhat comical that both Victory Day and Europe Day are celebrated on the same date. Europe is divided along political lines over which holiday is celebrated, considering that many current EU countries—who mark Europe Day—were also on the victorious side in WWII and, until a few years ago when relations with Russia soured, took part in Victory Day celebrations," Ristanovic told Kosovo Online.

He emphasized that the Western Balkans are following the “European trend,” in which the relationship with Russia is simplified into a binary: for or against. This dynamic has spilled over into the "symbolism" of attending the military parade in Moscow.

"There are leaders and political parties who send their representatives or leaders to Moscow for Victory Day, showing either a kind of loyalty to Moscow or publicly declaring their willingness to cooperate both with Russia and the rest of Europe. On the other hand, in the Balkans, political parties and governments that completely ignore Victory Day and only mark Europe Day signal loyalty to a united Europe, particularly regarding the war in Ukraine and relations with Russia," Ristanovic explains.

He believes the topic has largely taken on a day-to-day political dimension.

"I think this has become a question that, like everything else, has acquired a daily political dimension, where the attitude toward Russia and Victory Day is used to signal positions and gain public sympathy, perhaps to overshadow other issues. It creates a kind of political smokescreen," the historian states.

He views Pristina’s reactions to Vucic’s visit to Moscow in the same light.

"Pristina is a protectorate that is entirely dependent on Western aid, so they don’t have much choice. Ideologically, they align with the West. On the other hand, Russia does not recognize Kosovo and provides support to Serbia as a sovereign state to which Kosovo belongs. Therefore, Pristina has no incentive to even ideologically draw closer to Moscow," Ristanovic concludes.

Polarization and Reordering

Professor Boris Stojkovski of the History Department at the Faculty of Philosophy in Novi Sad also believes that the divisions around Europe Day and Victory Day reflect the degree of polarization in today’s international relations.

"This politicization is gaining importance in the context of EU–Russia relations, which are tied to the conflict in Ukraine, but also to a broader geopolitical reshuffling within the Western world," Stojkovski told Kosovo Online.

He believes that Europe Day and Victory Day "cannot go without one another."

"Victory Day—the day Germany capitulated—marks the end of WWII, the bloodiest conflict in human history, fought across all continents. It’s been called a total war. One of the consequences of that war was the emergence of a ‘new world’ in 1945, with the European Union as one of its foundations. It’s no coincidence that May 9 was chosen as Europe Day," Stojkovski concludes.

Extreme Populism

This view is partially shared by political analyst Artan Muhaxhiri from Pristina.

He believes Europe Day is a reminder of the efforts and sacrifices made to achieve continental cohesion, but that due to rising populism, the EU needs to be reshaped.

"Europe Day is a beautiful reminder of all the efforts and sacrifices made to achieve cohesion in Europe—social, economic, and sometimes political. However, in these times of extreme populism, Europe must reinvent itself, reshaping to better respond to the political and military changes taking place," Muhaxhiri said.

He adds that reshaping is necessary due to current security threats.

"Ideas that once seemed excellent now appear idealistic. With today’s threats at all levels, I think even Europe must reinvent itself and become far more decisive and powerful," says Muhaxhiri.

He argues that support for EU integration is higher in Kosovo than in Serbia due to historical, political, and religious factors.

He warns that prolonged normalization talks are weakening Kosovar citizens' support for the EU.

"I think it’s not like it used to be in Kosovo—expectations were extremely high, especially 10–15 years ago. But the dialogue process has dragged on for too long, and I think most people have lost faith that only Europe can bring Kosovo and Serbia to sign a final agreement. The U.S. is also pressuring Europe, and both Kosovo and Serbia. However, there are many variables, and they all must align for results," the analyst stresses.

He specifies that Belgrade has a different approach due to support from Moscow.

"Serbia has a different approach because its political establishment has ties and support from Russia—something incomparable to the EU’s integration plans. Everyone acknowledges this. So the problem is that Europe must be far more present both in Kosovo and in Serbia. Maybe the carrot-and-stick approach should be improved to create a more positive and constructive approach from both sides," Muhaxhiri concludes.

A New Beginning

Political scientist Nenad Markovic from Skopje emphasizes that the symbolism of Europe Day and Victory Day should be unifying, representing a new beginning for the European continent.

"The symbolism of both holidays was meant to be positive and unifying. Victory Day marks Nazi Germany’s capitulation to the Soviet Union, and it coincides with Europe Day, proclaimed shortly after WWII, sometime in the 1960s. However, these two dates were supposed to symbolize a new beginning for Europe," Markovic told Kosovo Online.

He explains that for Russia, this date symbolizes "liberation" from the greatest evil of the 20th century—Nazism.

"At the same time, Europe Day should represent all the values Europe stands for: tolerance, peaceful conflict resolution, unity, and solidarity. All the things now associated with the rather vague concept of European values. In that sense, it’s symbolic and interesting that both holidays fall on May 9, still linked to the symbolism of WWII’s end," says Markovic.

He adds that despite confusion between the two holidays—one marking Germany’s surrender in 1945, the other honoring the Schuman Declaration of 1950 seen as the start of the EU—they are compatible, but conflict between Europe and Russia has created tension.

"We can now say there’s a divergence. I wouldn’t say they are incompatible or that the date is the problem, but symbolically, they might represent different things—or at least people now perceive them differently. Especially on this side of the divide between Russia and Europe, it causes more contempt and misunderstanding than unity or connection. The relationship between the two sides is perhaps at its historical lowest point in centuries," Markovic elaborates.

He believes this issue is also reflected in the Western Balkans, especially in Belgrade–Pristina relations.

However, he notes that even in North Macedonia, sentiment toward Europe Day is shifting, with growing disillusionment over the slow EU accession process.

"Belgrade and Pristina don’t refer to this date, show no understanding, and there’s been no progress in their bilateral relations. Things are no better in Macedonia either. Public opinion on Europe Day is cynical. There’s enormous disappointment with the drawn-out integration process and the painful bilateral disputes assigned to us in the negotiation framework," Markovic concludes.

He justifies the situation in North Macedonia by pointing to citizens who are “tired, cynical, and harboring a degree of contempt” toward the EU.

“This is likely the result of everything that has happened over the past 20 to 30 years, especially since we became a candidate country and signed the Stabilization and Association Agreement around 2001. In that sense, I don’t think May 9 has the same significance as Europe Day as it did a few years ago, or before 2005–2006, when public opinion was much more positive. Support for the EU integration process remains high, but it is now only declarative. In essence, Macedonia is no longer willing to make concessions,” claims Markovic.

The greatest resistance, he says, lies in issues related to national identity.

“We’ll see whether some kind of X factor or contributing element will emerge to change our perception. I don’t see anything like that on the horizon, and this also reduces the willingness of domestic political elites to address this issue and commit to a more serious reform agenda. We’ll now see whether any progress can be made internally, without an external intervention factor, and what the quality of that might be—but we’ll have to wait,” Markovic says.

When it comes to Belgrade and Pristina, he also sees a “status quo,” with no signs of progress in the dialogue process.

“I do see a purpose, but I don’t see any motivation from either side to genuinely resolve the issue, because many political careers would likely end as a result. In that sense, this conflict is ideal for building an endless number of political careers and for capitalizing on the political value that such a radical and unresolved bilateral dispute generates,” says Markovic.

Hence, he sees no quick solution that could even gradually improve relations.

“But I do believe that at least the security aspect can be managed, and that there won’t be new incidents or provocations from either side—that things can be handled more calmly. Whether that will actually happen is uncertain, and that’s just my hope; we’ll see if it turns out to be wishful thinking or a realistic expectation,” Markovic says confidently.

He also attributes the current state of affairs to a “geostrategic reality that obscures the facts.”

“From Macedonia’s perspective, geostrategic realities obscure many things. When you hear that, after 20 years of serious efforts to join the European Union, Moldova and Ukraine suddenly gain an advantage, and Georgia too, it becomes clear that geopolitics often dictates the trends and that you’re practically powerless to change that. I don’t know if it obscures the facts, but it certainly clouds everything we’ve been trying to do for 20 years—including, for example, very painful bilateral disputes—one of which has been resolved and the other still ongoing or unresolved, to be precise. It overshadows all our efforts to get closer to the Union and to take action on the geopolitical level, in terms of foreign policy,” Markovic explains.

He is convinced that “heightened emotional rhetoric in Europe currently clouds the prospects for peace and prosperity.”

“Russia’s aggression against Ukraine has undoubtedly created a new geopolitical reality in which all sides have somewhat lost their bearings. Europe has realized how divided it is, how often it lacks the capacity to respond in a unified way, and that it now faces perhaps the most serious internal reform challenge in order to make better, more effective decisions. Potentially—I don’t know if this will happen or not—and people often label me a ‘war enthusiast,’ which I’m not, nor am I a supporter of any conflict, but I think Europe will likely become more militarized in the period ahead,” Markovic states.

He explains this through the EU’s new priorities: security and militarization.

“Europe feels unsafe, the continent is insecure, and all this money that could be invested in progress—in research and development, in education and social services—might now go elsewhere. We’ll see what direction things take. Perhaps Europe, as it currently stands, will relax if the Russian–Ukrainian conflict subsides and return to its previous path of demilitarization. However, I don’t know whether the path we’ve taken is reversible or irreversible. It might be a new kind of latent, perhaps low-intensity, Cold War that clouds sound judgment,” he concludes.