Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic admitted Monday that Serbia “mistakenly” voted in favor of a U.N. resolution condemning Russia for launching the war against Ukraine. Vucic stated he had intended for Serbia’s delegation to abstain.
The resolution passed in the U.N. General Assembly with a vote of 93-18, formally blaming Russia for the war. The U.S., which introduced a competing resolution calling for peace without assigning blame, voted against the condemnation. Serbia’s unexpected support for the measure raised eyebrows, as the country maintains friendly ties with Moscow and has avoided sanctioning Russia.
Vucic apologized to Serbian citizens, taking full responsibility for the error. He explained that while Serbia correctly abstained from voting on the U.S.-backed resolution, it should have done the same on the European-backed measure condemning Russia. He acknowledged the political fallout of his admission, particularly with European Union nations.
Russia responded positively to Vucic’s apology. Kremlin spokesman Dmitry Peskov called the correction “appealing,” emphasizing that technical errors happen.
Vucic’s admission underscores Serbia’s delicate balancing act between its historical ties to Russia and its aspirations for European Union membership. While Serbia has maintained a neutral stance on the Ukraine conflict, its sudden alignment with Western nations in the U.N. vote caused confusion among analysts and policymakers. The reversal could strain Serbia’s relationships with both Moscow and Brussels, as each side watches Serbia’s foreign policy moves closely.
Serbia has long been under pressure from the EU to align with its foreign policy, including imposing sanctions on Russia. However, Vucic has resisted such measures, arguing that Serbia must prioritize its own interests. The mistaken vote could be seen as an unintended shift toward the West, which may impact Serbia’s diplomatic standing in upcoming negotiations with both the EU and Russia.
The incident also highlights the complex nature of international diplomacy, where a single vote can have significant geopolitical consequences. While Vucic’s swift correction may have reassured Moscow, it also raises questions about the level of coordination and oversight within Serbia’s diplomatic apparatus. Critics may use the error to challenge Vucic’s leadership and decision-making on the world stage.
