Šolak’s anti-EU agenda: A hypocritical, interest-driven game — when the EU praises Serbian authorities, Šolak’s media attack them
The media in Dragan Šolak’s hands became his whip, with which he sought to manipulate and discipline anyone standing in the way of his enormous personal gain – but also to threaten and attack them. With United Group, he developed a mechanism for destroying competition, which Kurir had reported on for years, exposing the façade that was everything Šolak’s business practices were not. We have shown through numerous examples that the core of his business has always been trampling over all proclaimed values – and even laws and regulations – whenever it was necessary to protect or increase profit.
Thus, criticism of the European Union and negative reporting about senior European officials became a regular part of Šolak’s agenda, especially when his monopoly was endangered and the Serbian government was blamed for it. Šolak expected the EU to practically shut down Telekom, dismiss Vučić and replace him with his associate Đilas. When that, of course, did not happen, Šolak took up his media whip and spread negative sentiment towards the EU. The number of attacks launched by United Group against European officials and the negative reporting about them have certainly contributed to the decline in support for the EU among Serbian citizens.
The audience of N1, Nova S, Danas and other United Group outlets expect to see Euroscepticism or criticism of the EU everywhere except in those very outlets. Hence, this game of Šolak’s was not only hypocritical but also harmful to Serbia’s strategic goal.
We have come to a point where Serbia’s support for EU membership has now dropped to 33 per cent, the lowest among candidate countries, according to an Eurobarometer public opinion survey on perceptions of EU enlargement in member and candidate states, published by the European Commission in September. Citizens of Serbia express the greatest trust in Russia (59 per cent) and China (57 per cent), while the EU, with 38 per cent, ranks only third. The Eurobarometer findings show that as many as 45 per cent of Serbian citizens do not believe their country will ever become part of the EU, while only 38 per cent hold a positive view of the EU – also the lowest level compared with all Western Balkan countries.
The contribution of Šolak and his media to these discouraging figures cannot be measured precisely, but it certainly exists. In this sense, the façade of Šolak’s business – that of being pro-Western and pro-European, even Euro-fanatical in the editorial stance of his outlets – is of great importance. This façade was necessary for him to build an image with which he could court American, European, and other Western centres of influence, and thereby secure funding channels for his business. Taking an anti-Russian stance carried specific political weight and became an advantage in the eyes of Western financiers, particularly after Russia’s aggression against Ukraine.
Whenever an EU official was not explicit in criticizing Serbia and its president, Šolak’s media outlets – N1, Nova S and others – routinely framed that official in a negative context. For instance, former European Commissioner for Neighborhood and Enlargement, Oliver Várhelyi, throughout the years – even today, when no longer in office – occasionally appears in United Group media as a target of criticism for the praise he once gave to Serbia. Headlines such as “How Várhelyi, under Orban’s instructions, ‘ironed out’ reports on Vučić’s government” or “Brussels cannot give Belgrade the carrot while Vučić offers people the stick in the streets” illustrate this. Whenever Šolak needed a negative tone towards the EU, his media resorted to citing articles from other EU critics, selectively quoting only negative remarks. Examples include “Politico: Várhelyi favours Serbia and softens criticism on the rule of law” and “Financial Times: Why is the EU soft on Serbia?”.
When the President of the European Commission commended Serbia’s progress in certain areas, N1 and Nova S competed to produce the most spiteful headline and write pieces in which Ursula von der Leyen was virtually accused of causing the decline in public support for Serbia’s EU integration. Thus, following her visit to Belgrade last year, Nova S wrote that “statements by top European officials are ‘killing’ the already low support of our citizens for European integration”, with the headline: “How support for the EU declined in Serbia and what it has to do with the statements and actions of Europe’s top officials.”
Šolak’s hot-and-cold game was entirely self-interested and political, although presented as a principled struggle by his media to correct government failings. None of it was as N1, Nova S, and the other outlets portrayed it. Kurir has written extensively about the false image Šolak constructed, and in this context, the story of his Russian ties – which we, together with international investigative media, also exposed – is particularly relevant.
We have demonstrated with evidence that Šolak’s pro-Western image was not only a lie, on which he built his messianic role in the alleged fight for media freedom, but also a cover for parallel business dealings deeply entwined with the financial flows of official Moscow and Russian oligarchs. This aspect of Šolak’s business illustrates the fraudulent streak that has accompanied him literally since the inception of his private enterprise, as Kurir has written at length – at a time when he was still regarded by many as an untouchable and powerful player.
Kurir Editorial Team
