In a detailed story about the general mood in Serbia regarding the Ukrainian war and Russian President Vladimir Putin, New York Times (NYT) Andrew Higgins described it as a sense of victimhood and admiration for the “Russian brothers.”

NYT recalled an unpleasant political talk show on the pro-regime Happy TV in Belgrade where Ukraine’s ambassador was “air-ambushed.”

“Mindful of the angry and still-unhealed wounds left by NATO’s bombing of Serbia more than 20 years ago, Ukraine’s ambassador appeared on Serbian television after Russia invaded and bombed his country the hope of arousing sympathy.
Instead of getting time to explain Ukraine’s misery, however, the ambassador, Oleksandr Aleksandrovych, had to sit through rants by pro-Russian Serbian commentators and long videos of Russia’s president, Vladimir V. Putin, denouncing Ukraine as a nest of Nazis. The show, broadcast by the pro-government Happy TV, lasted three hours, more than half of which featured Mr. Putin.

Angry at the on-air ambush, the ambassador complained to the producer about the pro-Kremlin propaganda exercise but was told not to take it personally and that Mr. Putin ‘is good for our ratings,’” NYT described the event as an illustration of the mood in Serbia.

It added that, unlike many Western countries where Putin is viewed as a war criminal, in Serbia, he serves as a hero, “a reminder that the Kremlin still has admirers in Europe.”

NYT wrote that “part of Mr. Putin’s allure lies in his image as a strongman, an appealing model for President Aleksandar Vucic, the increasingly authoritarian leader of Serbia and Prime Minister Viktor Orban, the belligerently illiberal leader of Hungary. Facing elections on Sunday, the Serbian and Hungarian leaders also look to Russia as a reliable source of energy to keep their voters happy. Opinion polls suggest both will win,” the NYT said, adding that “then there is history or at least a mythologized version of the past, that, in the case of Serbia, presents Russia, a fellow Slavic and Orthodox Christian nation, as an unwavering friend and protector down the centuries.”

“But perhaps most important is Mr. Putin’s role as a lodestar for nations that, no matter what their past crimes, see themselves as sufferers, not aggressors, and whose politics and psyche revolve around cults of victimhood nurtured by resentment and grievance against the West,” the paper said.

It added that “a sense of victimhood runs deep in Serbia, viewing crimes committed by ethnic kin during the Balkan wars of the 1990s as a defensive response to suffering visited on Serbs, just as Mr. Putin presents his bloody invasion of Ukraine as a righteous effort to protect persecuted ethnic Russians who belong in ‘Russky mir,’ or the ‘Russian world.’”