Why Serbs Like Trump?

Written for Kosovo Online by Srdjan Garcevic, founder of The Nutshell Times

Just as the accusations that Donald Trump's policy towards the Balkans will be a result of underhand dealing and sycophancy started pouring from the usual sources, Wesley Clark, the former NATO Supreme Allied Commander in Europe during the 1999 bombing of Serbia, visited the region. In Priština, where local authorities greeted him with the usual obsequiousness, various companies tied to Clark sought lucrative business deals over the years, so much so that he was considered a poster boy of post-war corruption by the Politico, while in Northern Macedonia, where he was named an honorary citizen of a majority Albanian municipality of Čair, Clark's tolerance of Albanian extremist threatened to wreak the country apart just after the war. His damage to the world could have been even more significant: Clark infamously almost caused a confrontation between Russia and NATO in June 1999, which was only averted thanks to the wisdom of the British troops who refused his orders.

Clark is one of the many Western politicians who typify the "sensible" and "honest" policy in the Balkans, which has made the region poorer and less stable. He and many of those like him who filled various US administrations are the reason why Serbians are overwhelmingly pro-Trump.

Trump's anti-establishment rhetoric is attractive because we have repeatedly seen that their approaches simply do not work. Relations between Belgrade and Democrat-supporting Priština, as well as between Banja Luka and Sarajevo, are at a historic post-war nadir thanks to their dogmatic approach, which prioritizes the interests of one side.

Moreover, Trump's promise of a swift resolution to the war in Ukraine is welcome not only because it would make the possibility of confrontation between two nuclear superpowers less likely but also because it would make Serbian open foreign policy, which bridges East and West, less perilous and our economy more stable.

Finally, the US adventurism in Iraq, Syria, and Libya – which socialist Yugoslavia worked hard to keep out of the Soviet orbit through various development deals – not only showed recklessness but also made many Serbs who worked there see the US as a destructive rather than stabilizing force in the world.

The hope is that, like in the US, the people who want to make positive change will come to the fore and that we will be rid of the current posse of US clients whose effect has been either ineffectual or downright catastrophic for not only Serbian but also US interests.

It is not obvious how Americans profit from their country effectively paying the bills for an ardent ethno-nationalist, like Kurti, trying to cleanse Serbs from their ancient lands, only for his new state to either grow or export young men who turn to crime and even terrorism. There is also little logic in supporting networks of far-left ideologues within various NGOs who not only present the US as extremely "woke" and censorious but actively undermine popular support for causes they supposedly champion, only so that they could enmesh the US even further in local disputes.

This all makes sense only if the US wants to continue funding the careers of people who have used the US's global leverage for personal gain in the Balkans, making the region more fraught and tarnishing its reputation.

These resources can be better used to make the region more peaceful and prosperous, much like Donald Trump intended in his first term with major infrastructure investments. Indeed, one of the main things is that while Chinese and Russian money in Serbia can be seen in magnificent buildings, railways and roads people see and use daily, the US and, to a lesser extent, the EU money have become synonymous with networks of "pundits" and "experts," who do little to improve either the region or the US reputation.