Archived link

Serbia has been engulfed in protests for over six weeks as students and citizens demand accountability following the fatal collapse of a railway station canopy in Novi Sad, which claimed 15 lives on November 1. Demonstrators have accused President Aleksandar Vucic’s administration of corruption and negligence, particularly in its dealings with Chinese contractors under Beijing’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI).

The tragedy has turned public attention toward the opaque contracts and alleged nepotism tied to infrastructure projects involving Chinese firms, further intensifying scrutiny of Serbia’s growing relationship with China. The incident is not only a domestic crisis but also a potential blemish on China’s ambitious BRI.

Fatal Canopy Collapse Sparks Nationwide Protests

The canopy collapse occurred during a renovation of the Novi Sad railway station, part of a Chinese-led project to modernize Serbia’s railway infrastructure. The project involved China Railway International Co. (CRIC) and China Communications Construction Co. (CCCC), both of which denied direct involvement in constructing the canopy. Despite these claims, footage on social media suggests the collapse was caused by recently installed heavy glass.

[…]

President Vucic dismissed the protests as being fueled by foreign intelligence agencies aiming to destabilize his government. However, under mounting pressure, he agreed to meet some of the protesters’ demands. Transparency Serbia, a watchdog organization, criticized the government’s response, highlighting gaps in the documentation released, including the absence of the 2018 contract signed with the Chinese firms.

[…]

The Novi Sad railway renovation forms part of a broader agreement between Serbia and China under the BRI. These BRI agreements often include confidentiality clauses, which critics argue shield corrupt practices. The contracts are rarely open to competitive bidding, enabling subcontracts to be awarded to firms linked to Serbia’s ruling party.

While CRIC and CCCC maintain they did not directly construct the canopy, legal experts argue that as umbrella contractors, they are responsible for the performance of their subcontractors. This raises broader concerns about the quality and safety of BRI projects, particularly those involving local subcontractors.

[…]

Serbia’s strategic location as a bridge between Europe and Asia has made it a linchpin of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s flagship BRI. Chinese investments in Serbia have surged, with $6.4 billion in manufacturing foreign direct investments recorded in 2023 alone. In October, the two countries signed a free trade agreement, further cementing their economic ties.

However, Western critics have long decried BRI projects for their lack of transparency and accountability. The Novi Sad disaster could amplify these criticisms, undermining China’s efforts to promote its infrastructure projects in Europe.

[…]

    • thelucky8@beehaw.orgOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      18 hours ago

      Yeah, but that appears to be two sides of one coin. A year ago, a researcher from Hong Kong argued in a book that a rise in the number of autocracies “expand Chinese global influence via Belt and Road.” From the excerpt of this book:

      When rulers in autocracies with semi-competitive elections […] have a weak hold on power, their desire for Chinese spending is amplified. This relates to clientelism, or the delivery of goods and services in exchange for political support.

      A higher level of state control in autocracies grants political leaders greater influence over the allocation of clientelist benefits, which aids leaders’ reelection efforts.

      That’s maybe a good example that democracy -not ‘the West’- is China’s real and only enemy.

      • mayooooo@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 hours ago

        Oh I’m sure this all ties together nicely, just saying what the real humans are saying. Literally nobody cares about the Chinese influence by itself, the article seems to make that a really big deal. It sounds like a very western point of view, which is… different