Serbia between East and West

The Fletcher Russia and Eurasia Program recently hosted a lunch seminar with Ambassador Chris Hill, who served as the United States Ambassador to Serbia from 2022 to 2025. His remarks centered on the historical foundations of the U.S.-Serbia relationship and its evolving dynamics amid renewed Russian influence campaigns following the onset of the war in Ukraine.

With previous diplomatic postings in Iraq, South Korea, Poland, Macedonia, and Albania—and having served as Special Envoy to Kosovo under four U.S. administrations—Ambassador Hill brought a seasoned perspective on the complexities American diplomats face in engaging with Serbian officials and navigating the broader regional landscape.

Historical Background
Ambassador Hill began by outlining the evolution of Serbian national politics, starting with early nationalist efforts to secure independence from Austria-Hungary. He underscored the formation of Yugoslavia after World War I as a pivotal moment, initially fueled by idealistic visions of a Pan-Slavic union. However, these hopes eventually gave way to discontent among non-Serb populations, who increasingly viewed the state as Serb-dominated. Hill also discussed the disintegration of Yugoslavia and the lingering narrative within Serbia that the nation had been reduced to merely one-eighth of its original size. Serbia’s role as the dominant regional power—viewed with apprehension by smaller neighboring states—continues to shape regional politics.

Balkan Wars and NATO Intervention
Hill identified the U.S. and NATO interventions during the 1990s as the defining episodes in U.S.-Serbia relations. He argued that a limited understanding of Balkan complexities—exemplified by German-backed referendum proposals and oversimplified approaches to national identity—hampered conflict resolution. The NATO bombing campaign remains a point of deep contention in Serbia, contributing to persistent distrust toward the West and impeding progress toward European integration and recognition of Kosovo.

Postwar Dynamics and Russian Influence
Turning to the post-conflict period, Ambassador Hill emphasized Russia’s increasing assertiveness in the Balkans, particularly during the latter stages of the wars. He noted that strategic geography—especially access to the Adriatic coast—continues to shape Russian foreign policy. Russian business and political activity in Montenegro and Albania, he argued, was instrumental in accelerating their NATO accession. Serbia’s enduringly warm ties with Russia, in Hill’s view, stem largely from shared historical narratives and Russia’s opposition to NATO airstrikes. He stressed that Russian influence in the region poses a significant challenge to U.S. and European interests, warning that deeper Serbia-Russia ties may undermine regional stability. To counter this, he advocated for carefully calibrated diplomacy over broad-based condemnation, noting the ineffectiveness of the latter in the Serbian context.

President Vučić and the Ukraine War
Ambassador Hill concluded with an analysis of Serbia’s current posture, particularly under President Aleksandar Vučić amid the ongoing war in Ukraine. Contrary to depictions in Western media portraying Vučić as a pro-Russian strongman, Hill suggested a more complex reality. Vučić, he argued, is navigating deep domestic divisions while attempting to balance relationships with both Russia and the European Union. Notably, Vučić has taken actions counter to Russian interests, such as nationalizing a Russian-owned oil refinery and indirectly supporting Ukraine by facilitating arms exports. Hill closed by emphasizing the importance of nuanced diplomacy and the cultivation of personal relationships, cautioning against reductive narratives and blanket criticisms—particularly concerning human rights—that can hinder constructive engagement with Serbia.