The generation that shook the authoritarians
Despite differing organisational structures and political dynamics, the protests in Serbia and Turkey reveal several key similarities in how young people are responding to the erosion of democratic norms.
In both contexts, the initial triggers – though distinct – unleashed far deeper frustrations rooted in fears about the future. In Serbia, the collapse of a newly renovated train station canopy in Novi Sad that killed 16 people, seen as a tragic consequence of corruption and neglect, catalysed a movement grounded in demands for accountability and transparency. In Turkey, the annulment of the Istanbul mayor’s university diploma and his subsequent arrest were perceived as yet another politically motivated attempt to eliminate democratic opposition. These events exposed a broader anxiety among youth: that their rights, futures, and democratic spaces are increasingly vulnerable to authoritarian control.
What followed in both countries was a powerful civic awakening. Students from Serbia responded by building a non-partisan, autonomous movement. They deliberately avoided alignment with political parties, positioning themselves as moral actors with legitimacy rooted in civic responsibility. Their peaceful and creative resistance – symbolised by public silence commemorating the victims of the train station tragedy, university blockades, and physical endurance actions like long-distance cycling and running—was both emotionally resonant and politically effective. This self-organised model provided a sense of authenticity that helped mobilise wider societal support.
In Turkey, while the initial protests were catalysed by the main opposition Republican People’s Party (CHP), it was the students’ defiance in the face of police repression that proved pivotal. Their actions on university campuses, particularly the moment they broke through police barricades despite physical assault, marked a turning point. This act of courage reverberated far beyond university grounds, breaking a long-held atmosphere of fear and inspiring broader segments of society to take to the streets. The students’ bravery helped transform what might have remained a party-led mobilisation into a more widespread civic awakening.
Yet, notable differences remain. In Serbia, the student movement has maintained a strictly civic character, resisting any form of institutional co-optation. This has allowed for broad public support but has also left the movement without formal political leverage. On May 5th, students demanded early elections, declaring that the regime has no intention of meeting their demands and that functional institutions are not possible while it remains in power. In contrast, the protests in Turkey are more institutionally embedded through the CHP, offering stronger organisational capacity but also making them more exposed to state repression and political polarisation.
The response by state authorities also differed in scale and intensity. In Turkey, the government reacted with sweeping repression – mass arrests, heavy-handed policing, and restrictions on mobility and information. Over 1,100 individuals were detained, with social media curbs and public transportation disruptions used to limit mobilisation. President Erdoğan portrayed the protests as destabilising acts orchestrated by the opposition. In Serbia, although the state’s response relied primarily on discrediting campaigns, surveillance, and intimidation, it has also marked a concerning shift – for the first time in many years, individuals have been detained without legal basis for their political activism, effectively reintroducing political imprisonment into the country’s reality. These detentions, ongoing since March, signal an escalation in the state’s approach to dissent.
At the core of both movements, however, lies a shared generational refusal to be silenced. In both Serbia and Turkey, students are not merely reacting to specific incidents – they are challenging deeper structural issues: the erosion of trust in institutions, the concentration of power, and the shrinking space for democratic participation. Their mobilisation signals a generational call for accountability, dignity, and the right to shape their future.
An important development has been the emergence of informal cross-border inspiration. Students from Serbia have become a source of encouragement for the youth in Turkey who observed their peaceful, persistent activism with admiration. In return, symbols from protests in Turkey – such as the playful and subversive “Pikachu” protester – were embraced by students from Serbia, underscoring the cultural and emotional resonance between the movements. Though not formally linked, these protests demonstrate how civic energy and strategies can transcend national borders, much like the authoritarian tactics they confront.
While students from Serbia are trying to bring their struggle to the international stage through highly symbolic acts—such as cycling over 1,300 kilometres to Strasbourg and completing an ultra-marathon to Brussels to engage European institutions – their counterparts in Turkey face significant structural constraints. The restrictive visa regime has effectively confined students’ activism within national borders. This contrast highlights a deeper asymmetry in access to transnational solidarity and visibility, where the right to move freely becomes a political tool – either enabling or obstructing the global resonance of local resistance.
In both countries, the student protests reflect a renewed understanding of democracy – not just as a system of elections and institutions, but as a lived, participatory experience. In Serbia, students demand justice and transparency in a society still burdened by unresolved historical trauma and repeated episodes of state capture. In Turkey, students are challenging systemic repression in a state where dissent has become criminalised. The common thread is clear: these movements represent a generational declaration that fear will no longer dictate public life.
Looking ahead: A policy perspective
While it remains uncertain whether the protests in Serbia and Turkey will result in short-term political change, one outcome is undeniable: a new generation has found its voice. Their willingness to confront power, reclaim public space, and assert democratic values signals a critical shift in the political landscape of both countries.
From a policy standpoint, these movements deserve recognition, support, and protection. Governments must be held accountable for the repression of peaceful protest, while international partners – particularly the European Union – should acknowledge the democratic aspirations voiced by these young citizens. Support for civil society, human rights defenders, and independent institutions must be strengthened, and mechanisms for youth inclusion in decision-making expanded.
Equally important is the need for cross-border solidarity and learning. Just as authoritarian regimes share tactics, democratic actors must also share strategies, tools, and moral encouragement. Serbia and Turkey’s student movements remind us that democracy is not solely the domain of political elites – it lives and dies in the actions of ordinary citizens who choose to act.
And at this moment, it is the youth who are acting.
Peščanik.net, 09.05.2025.
