King Nikola dictates a letter at the end of the play “The Long Journey to Europe”, assuring his compatriots in exile that the money they send will be wisely used for the future of the youth, who will, in turn, repay that debt.
Perhaps it is time for Lord Miloš (Knjaz Miloš) to receive a theatrical work of his own as well, but this time as a comedy, since we too often interpret him as serious, cunning, and overly wise. The play should, through humour, highlight all his flaws and shortcomings. At the end, he could address future generations, entrusting them with the goal of catching up with Europe, while remaining convinced that they will never achieve it without him. And Miloš would have been right!
He would have said this out of vanity, yet he would have correctly anticipated that 191 years after the most brilliant moment in modern Serbian history – the Sretenje Constitution, all future generations would fail to catch up with Europe in terms of development. It sounds so disheartening that perhaps even Miloš himself would have governed differently had such a history not unfolded. Still, it is doubtful that he could have changed much. All generations after him bear responsibility for the fact that nearly two centuries of this long journey have not brought Serbia to the average level of European development. I am not speaking here about values – those can certainly be debated, especially in light of what that Europe has done over these two centuries, but about living standards and economic development.
After two centuries of striving to catch up with Europe, Serbia still lags so far behind in certain areas that it would need yet another century to close the gap, amounting to three centuries since Sretenje in 1835, and still no success. For future generations to understand this, since they will be the ones repaying today’s debts and bearing the responsibility for catching up with Europe. It is necessary to move from the realm of prose into the realm of research.
For this, we need a sufficiently long-time horizon, a tangible and simple data-based analysis, and a touch of emotion, one that I believe resonates with those for whom Sretenje holds meaning. All of this is necessary if we are to rise above the mire of daily politics and politicians who have adopted the worst traits of Lord Miloš, failing to understand that this is not about them or the present moment, but about Serbia’s centuries-long failure.
At the Institute for Development and Innovation, with the support of partners from what was once the heart of Europe – the Vienna Institute for International Economic Studies (wiiw) – we analysed the convergence of Serbia’s living standards toward the European Union average. We examined living standards across eight areas, ranging from the economy and infrastructure to healthcare and education. In each of these areas, we compared selected indicators with the EU average and assessed whether Serbia had caught up with or surpassed it.
We then calculated how long it would take for Serbia to reach the EU standard if trends from the past five years were to continue, in order to estimate the number of years required and better understand the overall time horizon. When everything is considered, Serbia generally lags across almost all areas, sometimes even more than it did two centuries ago. If one wonders how this is possible, given that we have made progress, the answer is simple: Europe, and later the EU, has advanced faster than we have. After two centuries, the greatest gaps remain in healthcare, the rule of law, and infrastructure. In these areas, it would take at least another century to reach the EU average if current trends from the past five years continue.
In the area of the economy, Serbia would need around 35 years to catch up with the EU average, with relatively low pensions being the main issue. In the field of social policy, it would take half a century to reach EU standards, while it is particularly discouraging that education and the environment are diverging further from the EU average, suggesting that, from today’s perspective, there is no clear path to convergence. The only area where Serbia stands out and which proves that progress is possible when there is genuine commitment, even when personal and societal interests align, is digitalisation. In this field, Serbia needs only two to three more years to reach the EU average.
Once the world of research has provided us with answers about the years of Serbia’s lag behind the European Union, it is fitting, especially in the spirit of a national holiday, to return to the realm of prose and speculate. We may wonder what would disappoint Miloš the most, perhaps even to the point of renouncing his power and vanity: would it be economic and social underperformance, poor roads much like in his own time, or something else entirely?
Or perhaps we might falsely romanticise Miloš and assume that what would disappoint him most is the fact that our education system is drifting further away from the European average. He might ask himself whether it was worth fighting and sacrificing so many lives, only for all future generations after him to fail to catch up with Europe in education.
Was it worth it? It will be. The responsibility lies with all future generations.
Author: Nenad Jevtović, BSc in Economics, Institute for Development and Innovation
