Nestorovic Camp: Jovanovic Is 'Wolf in Sheep's Clothing'

The parliamentary group Mi Snaga Naroda (We Are the People’s Strength), led by Prof. Dr. Branimir Nestorovic, sent the srpske.rs newsroom a new statement today, August 26, its second in two days, responding to Novi DSS president Milos Jovanovic. The message arrived by email at 11:57 a.m. with a request to publish it in full, and the newsroom verified the sender’s origin in the header.

Yesterday we published the group’s previous statement, in which it claimed that Jovanovic puts words in Nestorovic’s mouth and speaks on his behalf despite, by his own admission, never having spoken to him. The new statement goes a step further and challenges the very foundation of Jovanovic’s political identity: his sovereignism, and his claim to a say over who counts as the right wing.

The disputed point is the relationship with the European Union

The movement’s central objection is not personal but programmatic. Nestorovic’s camp argues that Jovanovic’s actual policy does not match his rhetoric.

“Jovanovic presents himself today as a sovereigntist, but his policy is far less sovereigntist than his rhetoric tries to make it look. His formula is clear: Serbia can cooperate with the European Union. That is exactly where the essence of his political position shows itself, the European course has not been abandoned, only renamed and narrowed. Jovanovic himself has spoken about the need for cooperation with all opposition parties, which in 2023 became one of the key points of dispute with Dveri and Zavetnici.”

That sends the dispute back three years, to the failed attempt to unite the right wing ahead of the 2023 election.

Who is responsible for the deal that never happened

The movement recalls the talks held at the time among Novi DSS, Dveri, Zavetnici and the People’s Party, and claims they broke down over the relationship with the pro-European opposition.

“When there was an opportunity in 2023 for state building and sovereigntist forces to unite, Jovanovic failed to reach an agreement with Dveri and Zavetnici. Representatives of Novi DSS, Dveri, Zavetnici and the People’s Party did discuss running together, but they split over key political questions, above all the relationship with the pro-European opposition.”

It follows that up with an assessment of how that episode is being retold today.

“Jovanovic today tries to present that same history by casting himself as the victim, the only man who wanted unity, while blaming others for the deal falling apart. But the facts are different.”

The Belgrade election boycott as a counterargument

The sharpest part of the statement concerns the right to pass judgment on patriotism, and here the movement’s counterargument is Novi DSS’s 2024 decision not to run in the Belgrade election.

“So today, when Jovanovic lectures Nestorovic on who the real right wing is, we have to remind him: he does not own patriotism, and no one gave him the right to issue certificates of Serbian patriotism. It is especially hypocritical that a man who keeps attacking Nestorovic today talks about fighting the authorities, when his own Novi DSS decided in 2024 not to take part in the Belgrade election, arguing it would be deeply wrong to join an electoral process that the SNS itself called an election.”

The question the movement draws from this is stated outright.

“And that is why the most important question today is: by what criterion does Jovanovic declare himself the authentic right wing while trying to deny Nestorovic’s political legitimacy?”

A complaint about media treatment, and the line the statement will be remembered for

The movement also claims it does not get the media space Jovanovic does, and in the same passage it uses the comparison that gave the whole statement its title.

“Perhaps the best description is the one citizens can recognize on their own: a wolf in sheep’s clothing. And while Jovanovic gets almost unlimited space in certain media outlets to explain who the authentic right wing is, who the opposition is, and what Nestorovic supposedly thinks, Mi Snaga Naroda gets nowhere near that kind of treatment from media that have for years shown a selective attitude toward sovereigntist political options.”

The statement closes with a message addressed directly to Jovanovic.

“Our message to Jovanovic is this: stop using Nestorovic as a substitute for your own political program. Stop presenting yourself as the owner of Serbian patriotism. And stop explaining to citizens who the real right wing is while at the same time trying to keep quiet about your own political history and true ideology.”

The question about Russia

The last part of the statement claims that Jovanovic has met with representatives of the British and American embassies while avoiding a clear position on Novi DSS’s relationship with Russia. From that, the movement draws the question that ends the statement.

“Why is Jovanovic so loud when it comes to attacking Nestorovic, and so restrained when it comes to clearly stating his own and his party’s position on Russia?”

What Jovanovic said on the same day

All of these assessments are the position of Nestorovic’s movement and should be read as such. Jovanovic had not responded to them by the time this article was published.

It is worth noting, however, that Jovanovic, in a statement to N1 television on that same day, explained why he believes the authentic right wing should run separately in the announced parliamentary election, citing both a matter of principle and a political and practical reason. He argued that the student list is essentially pro-European, and that the right wing carries its own 500,000 votes from the previous cycle. So on the same day, two political figures from the same side of the spectrum are disputing with each other over precisely the same issue: the relationship with the European Union.

The dispute has been running since at least August 21, when the Mi Snaga Naroda movement issued a statement calling an appeal to NATO hypocritical. It moved on through an assessment of who is to blame for the drop in the University of Belgrade’s ranking and yesterday’s statement about invented positions, arriving today at its sharpest tone yet. What has not changed throughout is that every message has gone in one direction: by their own account, the two men whose positions are being argued over have still not spoken to each other.