Journalist Miša Brkić believes that the resistance to lithium mining in Serbia is not solely about potential environmental pollution but also reflects a reluctance towards economic modernization and a distrust of multinational companies. Meanwhile, his colleague Radmilo Marković notes that the debate over Rio Tinto’s involvement has become polarized, with people being labeled either as lobbyists if they support it or as patriots if they oppose it.
Marković, speaking in the “Catch 23” series by FoNet News Agency, emphasized that the promise of building not just a lithium mine but also a battery and electric vehicle factory sounds promising on paper, provided that all environmental conditions are strictly adhered to. However, he is skeptical about the state’s ability to follow through on these promises due to the selective nature of its enforcement, benefiting only a narrow circle of government officials rather than society as a whole.
Brkić, on the other hand, argues that Serbia needs the mine, the battery factory, and the car factory. He advocates for political unity on the issue instead of the dismissive attitude of rejecting such developments outright. He points out that the Jadar project was initiated long before President Vučić took office in 2012, and since then, opposition has come from green-left activists, anti-globalists, and far-right nationalists.
Brkić suggests that if a Russian state company had proposed the lithium mine in Podravina, some of the current opponents might have supported it, welcoming Russian capital and technology. He expresses no preference for foreign ownership of the lithium mine, preferring it over state ownership, which he believes would be mismanaged similarly to the EXPO project.
The primary issues with Rio Tinto’s involvement, according to Brkić, are a lack of transparency and arbitrary decision-making. He advocates for the opposition to focus on protecting the area from environmental harm and ensuring transparency in the relationship between the state and the company. Brkić highlights that with rational thinking and a long-term perspective, Serbia has the potential to become a significant player in the global lithium market, which is projected to be worth $250 billion next year.
Marković recalls that the strategic commitment to privatize domestic natural resources has been in place since 2000, with Vučić continuing this trend through the privatization of Bor, the re-privatization of the steel plant Železara, and an unsuccessful attempt to sell Telekom. He suggests that Vučić realized Telekom could support his government, which it has been doing for several years.
He criticizes the increasing meaninglessness of selling factories and assets, as the state often ends up subsidizing salaries in foreign-owned factories, raising the question of the necessity of foreign investors in the first place. Marković describes this approach as “schizophrenic,” wanting a bit of both privatization and state control. He points out that Serbia has sold most of its natural resources, including spas and water sources, leaving only a few large companies whose sale will be politically decided.
Marković concludes that the public and voters have been excluded from these decisions, which have been made solely by the parliamentary majority, a trend he expects to continue.
