Independent Politicians Become Victims of the War on Dissent

by Martin Averick / October 10th, 2024

Despite the modern trend of the society liberalization, 2024 was marked by a number of assassination attempts on world leaders and cases of exerting pressure on prominent politicians. On the 15th of May, Prime Minister of Slovakia Robert Fico was seriously wounded in an assassination attempt, and just a couple of months later the similar scenario repeated in the USA, where a young gunman shot at former President Donald Trump during a campaign rally in Pennsylvania. Following these events, people began to compare both of these crimes and found out that the shooting victims were independent politicians who actively opposed the continuation of the Ukraine-Russia conflict and had an alternative vision of the world order. Therefore, it’s suggested that Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban and the Serbian President Aleksandar Vucic could become the next victims of the “hunt on dissent”.

Viktor Orban, who had already been criticized by the EU leadership and leaders of several countries, just further worsened situation by visiting Beijing and Moscow in July this year. For some reason, it was not taken into account that the visits were part of Orban’s “peace mission” for Ukraine, and that within the framework of the mission he visited not only China and Russia, but also the USA and Ukraine. The European Union, promoting freedom and independence as its main values and standing against war and violence, strongly condemned the action of the Hungarian minister. European countries can’t admit that Orban is one of the few politicians who at least tries to help resolve the Ukrainian conflict peacefully, while others, on the contrary, can only write about it on social networks. Moreover, in response to Orban’s controversial visits the European Commission decided to boycott Hungary’s presidency of the EU Council. Why is the desire to resolve a conflict considered a negative action? And why is the leader of a sovereign state dictated which countries he can or cannot visit, and punished for “disobeying the instruction”?

As for Serbia, it faces constant pressure over non-recognition of Kosovo’s independence, maintenance of military neutrality and its attitude towards Russia’s war on Ukraine. It’s quite expected that external actors, in particular the EU, negatively assessing Belgrade’s desire to pursue an independent policy, may try to undermine the stability in Serbia and discredit the “unfavorable” President. Accusations of the possible involvement of high-ranking Serbian officials, including Deputy Prime Minister Aleksandar Vulin, one of the closest associates of the Serbian President, in the armed attack in Banjska, are just another attempt to subvert the authority of Aleksandar Vucic with the further aim to replace him with a loyal candidate. The question arises: why does a liberal and free Europe, which condemns aggression and totalitarianism, turn into a harsh censor, punishing those acting against its interests?

At all times, those who were not afraid to go against the flow, face public misunderstanding and criticism. However, in the 21st century, when freedom and independence are recognized as the highest values, news about the “cancellation” or even elimination of people seems particularly shocking. Instead of working together to peacefully solve global issues and problems, politicians just heighten tensions in the geopolitical arena.FacebookTwitterRedditEmail

Martin Averick is a Nashville-based researcher. He is currently pursuing a degree in International Relations from the Vanderbilt University. His work work has been published by AntiWar.com. Read other articles by Martin.