标签： Europe

BELGRADE, Serbia — As a new year of political opposition unfolds in the Balkan nation, Serbia’s dissident university student movement is preparing to stage its first major mass gathering this weekend, reigniting a grassroots campaign for sweeping systemic change under the long-ruling authoritarian administration of President Aleksandar Vucic.

Organizers expect thousands of participants to travel from across the country to converge on Belgrade’s iconic Slavija Square on Saturday, a location already etched into the nation’s recent protest history. This site hosted a massive anti-government demonstration last March, a gathering that ended abruptly amid contested claims that state forces deployed a sonic weapon against peaceful attendees — an allegation Vucic’s government has repeatedly denied.

This student-led movement first emerged as a formidable political force in late 2024, galvanized by public outrage over the Novi Sad train station collapse that killed 16 people. The tragedy struck a deep chord across Serbian society, with widespread public belief that the disaster stemmed from endemic corruption and systemic negligence in state-funded infrastructure projects. What began as a call for accountability quickly ballooned into a months-long nationwide movement: students blocked university faculties across the country throughout 2025, successfully forcing the resignation of former Prime Minister Milos Vucevic and his entire cabinet. Protesters argued this step was insufficient, however, and have continued to demand early national elections — a call Vucic has so far refused to answer.

Last year, the movement anchored a sweeping wave of anti-corruption street protests that posed one of the most significant threats to Vucic’s power in years. Today, student leaders say their efforts are now focused on upcoming national elections, expected to take place either later this year or in 2027, which they aim to use to remove Vucic’s right-wing populist government from power.

“We hope a great many people will join us, spend the day with our movement, and continue standing with students as we prepare for these elections,” youth movement representative Isidora Jovanovic told the Associated Press. “Serbia is long overdue for change, and students are the ones who will deliver that change.”

Tensions have already been building in the capital in the lead-up to Saturday’s rally. On Tuesday, police were forced to intervene to separate pro-Vucic loyalists from students printing “Students win” protest materials. Just days before that confrontation, an elderly man was injured when a driver rammed through a student-organized traffic blockade in central Belgrade. These incidents are not isolated: political violence has marred opposition gatherings for months, including clashes that disrupted local elections last March.

Jovanovic emphasized that event organizers have taken extensive steps to prevent unrest at Saturday’s gathering, noting that many attendees will be traveling from out of town. “We do not want any of our fellow citizens to leave with a bad experience or injuries,” she said.

Political analysts note that the once-reactive student movement has matured into a cohesive political force capable of challenging Vucic’s long-dominant Serbian Progressive Party. Dusan Vucicevic, a professor at Belgrade’s Faculty of Political Sciences, told the AP that the movement commands broad cross-public support and is positioned to deliver strong results in any future election.

“We finally have a legitimate political group that can effectively challenge the Serbian Progressive Party and Aleksandar Vucic himself,” Vucicevic said.

Vucic has not remained passive in the face of this growing opposition. Pro-government media outlets have repeatedly labeled student protesters and other critics as foreign-backed terrorists and agents seeking to destabilize Serbia, a rhetoric that has deepened the country’s already stark political divisions. For Saturday’s rally, Vucic’s loyalists are expected to occupy a pro-government park camp outside the presidency building that Vucic established last March, widely seen as a deliberate buffer against opposition demonstrations. Multiple attacks on protesters and journalists have been reported near the camp since its establishment.

Allegations of excessive force by police and arbitrary detentions of opposition activists have drawn sharp international scrutiny of Vucic’s government. The European Union has warned that Serbia’s ongoing democratic backsliding could result in the loss of roughly 1.5 billion euros ($1.8 billion) in accession funding allocated to the country as a candidate for EU membership.

Despite rising tensions and the threat of confrontation, a new generation of young Serbs is stepping up to join the movement, expressing unshakable optimism that political change is within reach. Branislav Vasic and Filip Novakovic, both 19-year-old freshmen at the Faculty of Political Sciences, confirmed they will be among the attendees at Saturday’s rally, saying standing with older opposition leaders is a matter of principle.

“Everyone has an obligation to join this rally, given the state of our country,” Vasic said. “I’m convinced that as long as people want change, we have the strength to deliver it.”

Novakovic echoed that sentiment, framing the moment as a historic opportunity for his generation to finish the work past generations could not complete. “We are all in this together, and we are one step away from a better future,” he said. “This is a long struggle, and I will keep fighting for it as long as I live.”

As U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio departs for a critical NATO foreign ministers’ gathering in Helsingborg, Sweden, his core mission is clear: calm rising unease among Washington’s European allies over the Trump administration’s inconsistent approach to the transatlantic alliance and unclear plans for American troop levels across the continent.

Friday’s gathering will coincide with separate briefings at NATO’s Brussels headquarters, where senior Pentagon leaders are set to outline the U.S. military’s long-term defense commitment to the 32-nation bloc. The meeting comes as a precursor to July’s NATO leaders’ summit in Istanbul, unfolding against a backdrop of sweeping global security uncertainty: the unresolved trajectory of the ongoing war in Iran, and stalled U.S. efforts to restart peace negotiations to end the two-year Russia-Ukraine conflict. Lingering friction also remains from President Donald Trump’s repeated public criticism of underfunding by European allies, and his controversial public interest in acquiring the autonomous Danish territory of Greenland, a NATO member asset.

Rubio has emerged as the Trump administration’s go-to diplomat for de-escalating tensions at high-stakes allied gatherings, tasked with projecting a more measured, less confrontational tone than the president often delivers. This already marks his third such outreach mission in 2025, following February’s Munich Security Conference and a recent trip to Rome, where he met with Italian government leaders and Pope Leo XIV. That meeting came after Trump publicly attacked the American-born pontiff over his positions on street crime and U.S. policy in the Iran war.

A major source of confusion for allies right now centers on contradictory signals about U.S. troop deployments in Europe. Ahead of his departure for Sweden, Rubio declined to answer questions about potential adjustments to the number of U.S. troops assigned to the NATO Force Model, the alliance’s core contingency defense plan for major European security crises. Just days before the meeting, the Trump administration first announced it would cancel planned deployments of thousands of troops to Poland and Germany. Then on Thursday, Trump posted a surprise reversal on social media, declaring the U.S. would deploy an additional 5,000 troops to Poland. To date, no clarification has emerged: it remains unclear whether the previously canceled deployment is being reinstated, whether the 5,000 troops represent an additive increase to rotational presence, or whether an overall drawdown of U.S. forces in Europe will still proceed from other theater locations. The Pentagon redirected all press queries to the White House, which has not issued an immediate response to requests for clarity.

While Rubio reaffirmed his position as a self-described “strong supporter” of the transatlantic alliance, he did not soften the Trump administration’s core criticism of NATO’s response to the Iran war. He told reporters ahead of his flight from Miami that the entire administration, including the president, is “very disappointed” in the alliance’s inaction, a sentiment Rubio said should come as no surprise to any participating ally.

In pointed remarks, Rubio called out NATO member Spain specifically for refusing to grant the U.S. access to its Spanish-based military bases for operations related to the Iran conflict. He also noted that many other allies have rejected calls to join a U.S.-led coalition to re-open and secure the Strait of Hormuz, the critical global oil shipping chokepoint that Iran has effectively closed to commercial traffic in recent months. “I know why NATO is good for Europe, but why is NATO good for America?” Rubio asked rhetorically during his pre-departure press briefing, answering his own question by pointing to the value of European bases for global U.S. power projection. “So, when that is the key rationale for why you’re in NATO, and then you have countries like Spain denying us the use of these bases, well, then, why are you in NATO?”

Rubio added that while nearly all NATO allies formally back the U.S. position that Iran must not be permitted to develop a nuclear weapon, almost none have stepped up to back Trump’s preventive military action. “He’s not asking them to commit troops. He’s not asking them to send their fighter jets in. But they refuse to do anything, and so I think the president looks at that and says, ‘Hold on a second,’” Rubio said. “I think we were very upset about that. The president has made that very clear.”

Top NATO officials have attempted to downplay the chaos around shifting U.S. troop plans, framing adjustments as part of long-planned reorientation that allies were notified of well in advance. NATO Secretary-General Mark Rutte told reporters Wednesday that European allies have been aware for a full year that the Trump administration planned to withdraw some U.S. troops from the continent. Rutte said it is reasonable to expect European and Canadian members to take on greater responsibility for conventional defense of the alliance, particularly in Europe. While Rutte affirmed the U.S. will remain engaged in transatlantic security, he acknowledged that over time Washington may reallocate military resources to other global hotspots.

U.S. General Alexus Grynkewich, the commander of both U.S. and NATO forces in Europe, echoed that message this week, saying current security commitments will not leave Europe with a defense gap, but warned allies to prepare for additional incremental U.S. troop drawdowns over the coming years. The Trump administration has repeatedly made clear to European allies that in the long term, the continent will need to take full ownership of its own security, including defense support for Ukraine against Russian aggression.

In a sudden reversal of a recent Pentagon decision, U.S. President Donald Trump announced Thursday that the United States will deploy an extra 5,000 troops to Poland. The announcement comes just seven days after the Department of Defense scrapped a planned deployment of 4,000 troops to the Eastern European nation, leaving defense analysts and European allies scrambling to interpret the shift in U.S. military posture on the continent.

Breaking the news via his social platform Truth Social, Trump framed the new deployment as a gesture rooted in his close personal and political alignment with Polish President Karol Nawrocki. Trump endorsed Nawrocki during Poland’s 2025 presidential election, and the Polish leader has repeatedly positioned himself as one of Trump’s most vocal European supporters. The U.S. president offered no additional clarity on whether the 5,000 additional troops represent an expansion of the original canceled deployment, a revised iteration of that plan, or an entirely separate military operation.

The revised troop plan arrives amid a broader restructuring of U.S. military presence across Europe, driven by the Trump administration’s signature “America First” policy agenda that has prioritized reducing overall U.S. defense commitments overseas. Earlier this month, Trump followed through on a threat to withdraw 5,000 U.S. troops from Germany amid a heated public dispute with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz over Washington’s approach to the ongoing conflict with Iran. Trump lashed out at Merz after the German leader suggested that U.S. negotiators had been “humiliated” during talks with Iranian officials, and the withdrawal moved forward quickly despite bipartisan pushback in Washington.

To date, it remains unconfirmed whether the troops bound for Poland are the same forces being drawn down from Germany, or an entirely new contingent. Beyond tensions with Germany, Trump has openly criticized fellow NATO allies for refusing to back the U.S. in escalating pressure on Iran over shipping access through the Strait of Hormuz, a critical global energy chokepoint.

The announcement comes ahead of a high-stakes NATO foreign ministers summit kicking off Friday in Stockholm, where U.S. Secretary of State Marco Rubio will lead the American delegation. Top of the agenda for Rubio is expected to be renewed demands for NATO member states to increase their own defense spending and share more of the alliance’s collective defense burden, a longstanding priority for the Trump administration.

Ahead of the summit, BBC reporters pressed Rubio on unconfirmed intelligence reports suggesting the U.S. plans to reduce its total available troop commitments for collective defense in the event of an attack on any NATO member. Rubio would not confirm the reports, but confirmed that “some of those issues” would be on the summit’s negotiating table, adding that Trump remains “very upset and disappointed” with the alliance over its failure to meet U.S. demands for greater burden sharing.

The U.S. Defense Department’s initial cancellation of the 4,000-troop deployment to Poland last week sparked widespread confusion across European capitals about U.S. security commitments. Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth later sought to calm those fears, framing the cancellation as nothing more than “a temporary delay” and reaffirming that the U.S. remains committed to maintaining a robust and credible military posture across Eastern Europe.

Nawrocki, who secured Poland’s presidency with Trump’s public backing, has long positioned himself as a staunch ally of both Trump and U.S. security goals in Europe. In a January interview with BBC Radio 4’s *Today* programme, Nawrocki argued that Trump is the only global leader with the ability to confront Russian President Vladimir Putin and negotiate an end to the ongoing war in Ukraine. Despite Trump’s repeated public criticism of the NATO alliance and his fractious relationships with other European leaders, Nawrocki has consistently maintained that the United States remains the primary guarantor of collective security across Europe.

Even within Trump’s own party, the administration’s shift on European troop deployments has drawn criticism. Multiple congressional Republicans have already spoken out against the planned withdrawal of 5,000 troops from Germany, warning that the drawdown risks sending a dangerous signal of weakened U.S. resolve to the Kremlin, which continues to maintain aggressive military posturing along NATO’s eastern border.

Currently, the United States maintains its largest European military footprint in Germany, hosting more than 36,000 active-duty troops across the country. By comparison, the U.S. has roughly 12,000 troops deployed in Italy and an additional 10,000 across the United Kingdom.

For weeks, the Trump administration has sent conflicting, shifting signals about its planned military posture in Europe, and a sudden announcement from former President Donald Trump on Thursday has only deepened the confusion among U.S. policymakers and European allies alike. In a post on his social media platform Truth Social, Trump revealed that the United States would deploy an extra 5,000 American troops to Poland, a complete reversal of the administration’s weeks of public comments committing to reduce — not expand — the U.S. military footprint across the continent.

The policy whiplash comes against a backdrop of growing transatlantic tension over defense burden-sharing and U.S. strategy amid the ongoing Ukraine war. For weeks, the Trump administration has openly stated it planned to cut approximately 5,000 troops from its European force levels. U.S. officials had already confirmed that roughly 4,000 service members slated for a rotational deployment to Poland had their orders canceled, as part of this broader drawdown plan. A planned deployment of long-range missile personnel to Germany was also halted, aligning with Trump’s earlier order to shrink the U.S. military presence in Europe. Earlier this month, Trump even told reporters that planned cuts would go “a lot further than 5,000,” reinforcing expectations of a significant drawdown.

Trump’s new announcement directly upends that trajectory, leaving NATO allies already caught off guard by previous policy shifts facing even more uncertainty. For months, the Trump administration has publicly pressured NATO member states to increase their own defense spending, criticizing many allies for failing to carry a sufficient share of collective defense costs and not doing enough to support U.S. policy amid tensions with Iran. These tensions grew after German Chancellor Friedrich Merz publicly criticized the administration’s lack of a clear strategy for the Iran conflict, saying the U.S. had been “humiliated” by Iranian leadership. In response, the administration moved forward with plans to draw down at least 5,000 troops from Germany.

In his Truth Social post, Trump framed the new troop deployment as a gesture of support for Poland’s newly elected President Karol Nawrocki, whom he had publicly endorsed during the country’s election. “Based on the successful Election of the now President of Poland, Karol Nawrocki, who I was proud to Endorse, and our relationship with him, I am pleased to announce that the United States will be sending an additional 5,000 Troops to Poland,” Trump wrote.

The conflicting announcements have sparked sharp criticism from lawmakers on both sides of the U.S. political aisle, who argue that erratic policy on European troop deployments sends a dangerous message to U.S. allies and to Russian President Vladimir Putin amid the four-year-long full-scale war in Ukraine. Republican Rep. Don Bacon of Nebraska told a congressional hearing that Polish officials had been “blindsided” by the earlier canceled deployment, calling the initial drawdown decision “reprehensible” and “an embarrassment to our country what we just did to Poland.”

Pentagon officials have attempted to clarify the situation in recent days, but their statements have done little to resolve the ambiguity. Chief Pentagon spokesman Sean Parnell said Tuesday that the canceled deployment was only a “temporary delay,” not a permanent reversal, and described Poland as a “model U.S. ally.” He explained that the delay stems from the administration’s plan to reduce the number of brigade combat teams stationed in Europe from four to three, and said the Pentagon has not yet made final decisions about which units will be assigned to which forward positions.

To date, it remains unclear what Trump’s new announcement means for existing plans: it is unknown whether the previously delayed 4,000-strong brigade will now deploy to Poland, whether the extra 5,000 troops will be added on top of existing rotational deployments, or whether the planned overall drawdown of 5,000 troops from Europe will still proceed, only taking cuts from locations other than Poland. When reached for comment to clarify the policy, the Pentagon directed all inquiries to the White House, which has not yet issued a formal response to requests for clarity. This week, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Defense Undersecretary Elbridge Colby have both held calls with their Polish counterparts, and Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk said Wednesday that he was “happy to hear Washington’s declaration that Poland will be treated as it deserves.”

As of last week, U.S. Gen. Alexus Grynkewich, commander of U.S. and NATO forces in Europe, confirmed to reporters in Brussels that the administration’s plan remained for 5,000 troops to withdraw from Europe. Trump’s announcement comes as Secretary of State Marco Rubio travels to Sweden for meetings with NATO foreign ministers, who have already raised repeated questions about the Trump administration’s inconsistent troop policy.

Retired career diplomat Ian Kelly, who served as U.S. ambassador to Georgia during the Obama administration and first Trump term and now teaches international relations at Northwestern University, said the conflicting announcements point to a lack of deliberate policy process at the highest levels of the administration. “There seems to be no process to deliberating policies like troop withdrawals and deployments at the top,” Kelly said. He noted that Rubio will likely face a difficult task explaining the sudden policy shifts to European allies, who have repeatedly called for consistent, predictable U.S. security policy even when they disagree with specific administration decisions. “These are not well thought out decisions,” Kelly said. “These are impulsive decisions based on Trump’s whims or what his advisors think are Trump’s whims.”

Associated Press writer Michelle L. Price contributed reporting to this article.