Vucic Invites Opponents to Talks, Opposition Calls It Fake

Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic posted a video message on Instagram on July 17, inviting all of his political opponents to dialogue ahead of the elections. In the clip he said that civilized conversation is the essence of a democratic society and that he had called for it several times, but, as he put it, without any response from the other side.

Vucic also stated that he would congratulate his rivals within an hour or two if the elections showed that he had lost. The message arrived as the political scene heats up before the electoral cycle, with part of the opposition gathered around a student list trying to use the referendum mood as a framework for its campaign.

Shortly after the post, National Assembly Speaker Ana Brnabic responded with the message “We are waiting for an answer” and asked whether the opposition would finally accept what she called the offered hand. The governing side used her reaction to push the pressure back onto its rivals and to present the call for talks as a gesture of goodwill awaiting reciprocity.

Why is the call for dialogue disputed?

The opposition did not receive the message as an offer, but as a tactical move. Srdjan Milivojevic of the Democratic Party called the invitation fake and said it was an attempt to weaken the student list and break up the mood building around the referendum demands. By that logic, the call for talks does not open room for agreement, but shifts the burden onto opponents who, if they refuse, look unwilling to talk.

A similar tone comes from analytical circles. Political scientist Srdjan Cvijic warns that the invitation is insincere and that its goal is to weaken the student list rather than to genuinely seek compromise. It is a familiar pattern from earlier electoral cycles: the government offers talks at a moment that suits it politically, and later uses the opponents’ refusal as an argument in the campaign.

The core of the dispute is not whether talks are offered, but under what conditions and with what aim. For the government, the invitation is proof of openness. For the opposition, it is a trap meant to disrupt the mobilization of voters dissatisfied with those in power.

What the move means before the vote

The timing is not accidental. The message was released as the campaign is only taking shape, with the student list trying to establish itself as a serious electoral factor. If Vucic manages to make talks the topic, part of public attention shifts from the referendum demands to the question of whether the opposition will or will not come to the table.

For now, there is no clear opposition answer on a concrete format for talks. Through Brnabic, the government holds that the ball is in the other court. Through Milivojevic, the opposition says it will not take part in what it sees as a staged gesture. In such a setup, both silence and agreement carry political risk, so each side weighs which move costs less.

The coming days will show whether the invitation stays at the level of a video message or turns into a real meeting with an agenda. Until then, the only concrete fact is that both the government and the opposition have already turned the call for dialogue into a campaign weapon.

Do you see the pre-election call for dialogue as a sincere offer or a tactical move, and what would the opposition gain or lose by sitting down at the table?