Russia says it has been betrayed, and Putin is bullying Vučić, which will only accelerate Serbia's tilt toward the West!

In recent days, Russia's Foreign Intelligence Service (SVR) suddenly released a重磅 statement accusing Serbian military enterprises of transferring hundreds of thousands of shells, rockets, and over one million bullets to Ukraine through third-party channels, directly used on the battlefield between Russia and Ukraine. Moscow described this action as a "strategic strike" and specifically named companies such as Krusik and ZenitProm as key entities involved.

This accusation shocked the international community. Serbian President Vučić quickly responded, promising to investigate relevant contracts and willing to form a joint investigation team with Russia, but did not deny the flow of weapons to Ukraine, only emphasizing the need to maintain employment in the arms industry.

In fact, as early as June 2024, British media reported that Serbian entities had sold $800 million worth of arms to Ukraine through third parties. At that time, Vučić admitted to the existence of the transaction but said he would not interfere with the buyer's use.

The traditional alliance between Russia and Serbia stems from their shared Slavic and Orthodox Christian background, and the two countries have long cooperated at critical historical moments. However, in recent years, under pressure from the EU, Serbia has "leaned westward," causing dissatisfaction among Russian circles. This military aid accusation is seen as a breach of the底线 set by Russia, especially during the ongoing war in Ukraine, considered as "betrayal."

Serbia's military industry relies on exports for revenue, known for its low cost and high efficiency. In recent years, demand due to the Ukraine war has surged. Moscow accused it of circumventing inspections through transit via Czech Republic, Poland, and African countries. Although Vučić claimed there was no evidence showing weapons entering Ukraine through Africa, international media had previously disclosed such "gray channel" operations.

Russia described this incident as marking the "limit of tolerance" towards Serbia, while Vučić faces a dilemma: He must appease Russia while preserving his country's pillar industries. Serbia's "neutrality" is essentially a compromise of interests, and this incident may force it to clarify its diplomatic stance.

If before Serbia could still play the "neutral card" to maneuver between two camps, now it must make a clearer choice. Is it to continue maintaining historical and cultural ties with Russia or adapt to Western trends and fully turn to the NATO system?

This "stabbing-in-the-back" incident may become a pivotal turning point in Serbia's foreign policy direction.

#

Original article: https://www.toutiao.com/article/1833592901670924/

Disclaimer: The article solely represents the author's personal views.