I vividly remember a friend’s story of how, when Yugoslavia broke up, the European identity was a salvation for many after an extremely difficult period of war and devastation. He would passionately explain that, as the Yugoslavia umbrella dissolved, Europe gave them hope and promised to fulfill their aspirations for freedom and better life opportunities. Since then, only Croatia and Slovenia have joined the EU. The path has proven longer and harder for others, particularly Serbia. This delay has created frustration both on the level of the political leadership and among the citizens. Last week, expressing this frustration, Serbian Deputy Prime Minister Aleksandar Vulin positioned the BRICS grouping as a compelling alternative to the EU, emphasizing its attractiveness for Belgrade. He noted that, unlike the EU, BRICS does not impose political conditions, such as demanding recognition of Kosovo’s independence, or other internal political changes. Vulin compared the two blocs and said that BRICS controls more than 51 percent of the world’s gas and 47 percent of its oil. He then emphasized the main topic of tension: the fact that Serbia will not impose sanctions on Russia or go to war just to join the EU, stressing that Belgrade values cooperation based on mutual respect, neutrality and equality. Some analysts saw Vulin’s remarks as a potential shift in Serbia’s global alliances, particularly as BRICS is seeking to expand its influence. The reality is more nuanced. I would disagree on the benefits BRICS could bring to Serbia versus EU access. BRICS in no way, shape or form has the benefits or strong ecosystem the EU offers its members. This is something Serbia needs to be aware of and know to appreciate. It is, in my opinion, well worth some sacrifices. It is not the time to sink into a tit-for-tat exchange, but a time to find acceptable solutions that preserve the interests of all parties Khaled Abou Zahr If we look at the issues still hindering Serbia’s access, they are political: the status of Kosovo and its relations with Russia. It is worth noting that those same issues are also major geopolitical risks for the future stability and integrity of the EU and Europe. Therefore, Belgrade’s accession to the EU should not be put aside or met with aggression from EU officials. It is not the time to sink into a tit-for-tat exchange, but a time to find acceptable solutions that preserve the interests of all parties. There is no doubt that the main issue that needs to be resolved is the relationship between Serbia and Kosovo. This is the source of a direct security risk and outside interference in European affairs. In other words, this should be a top priority for European leaders. It should not be delayed. Indeed, what can be mended today might not be fixable tomorrow in this rapidly changing conflict world map. On the other hand, if this first issue is put at the forefront, I do not think Serbia’s stance and good relations with Russia should be something to put in the limelight, or fear that Belgrade is Moscow’s Trojan horse. It is damaging and purposeless. There are historical and religious links that cannot and will not be erased. What is more important is to make the citizens of Serbia feel that their core is in the EU. Sometimes, when reading some European leaders’ declarations, there is an underlying note that indicates that they still hold Serbia accountable for the war of the 1990s. That somehow it has not paid for its crimes and its attachment to Moscow symbolizes this. Hence, it presents a risk for the future of Europe. And so, they have placed Serbia in EU purgatory. But this situation will increase frustration and encourage greater links with non-EU powers — and this is what presents much greater risks. This situation will increase frustration and encourage greater links with non-EU powers — and this is what presents much greater risks Khaled Abou Zahr The EU has proven its capacity to integrate and create opportunities. It has been highly successful in its enlargement efforts, expanding from its original six founding members to 27 countries as of 2024. Through its enlargement process, the EU has promoted stability, democracy and economic growth in regions once divided by Cold War tensions or authoritarian rule. One of the most notable successes that can serve as an example was the inclusion of former communist countries from Central and Eastern Europe, such as Poland, Hungary and the Czech Republic, which joined in 2004, marking a significant shift toward European integration. There are good economic initiatives attached to the new “Growth Plan” for the Western Balkans. A strategic initiative aimed at accelerating the region’s economic development and fostering closer integration with the EU, backed by a €6 billion ($6.5 billion) financial package. The plan emphasizes increased investments in infrastructure, digitalization and the energy transition, along with stronger support for small and medium-sized enterprises to drive innovation and job creation. It also prioritizes enhancing regional cooperation, improving governance and advancing the rule of law to meet EU standards. Youth and education programs are central to reducing brain drain and strengthening human capital in the region. With this comprehensive approach, the EU seeks to address socioeconomic disparities, promote long-term stability and support the Western Balkan states on their path to eventual EU membership. And so, the EU leadership needs to build momentum toward solving all political issues with Serbia and have it join the EU as soon as possible. Bringing Belgrade into its fold would remove a great risk to the stability of the continent in extremely volatile times. It should not be delayed any longer. Khaled Abou Zahr is the founder of SpaceQuest Ventures, a space-focused investment platform. He is CEO of EurabiaMedia and editor of Al-Watan Al-Arabi.