Tuesday, May 26, 2026
Today's Edition

EveryNews

Stories that matter, signal over noise

Business

Negotiations Ongoing Since 2005: Ukraine and Serbia Resume Work on Free Trade Agreement

Kachanets and Lazarevich signed a joint statement in Belgrade on resuming negotiations — but the statement is not an agreement, and the main obstacle remains: Serbia is still not a member of the WTO.

Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

By Tetiana Suchkova-Ladik

May 21, 2026 · 3 min read

Negotiations Ongoing Since 2005: Ukraine and Serbia Resume Work on Free Trade Agreement
Фото: Офіс віцепрем'єра з питань європейської та євроатлантичної інтеграції / Facebook

On May 21 in Belgrade, Ukraine's Vice Prime Minister Taras Kachka and Serbia's Minister of Trade Jagoda Lazarevic signed a joint statement on resuming negotiations regarding a free trade agreement. The document fixes an intention — not timelines, not an arbitration mechanism, not a date for signing the final agreement.

20 years and a fourth attempt

Negotiations between the two countries began in 2005 — as part of Serbia's accession process to the World Trade Organization. Since then, there have been at least four rounds, including a Kyiv round, where the parties "achieved progress in agreeing on market access for goods" — yet the agreement was never signed. At the end of last year, the Ukrainian side renewed interest in the negotiations and submitted a draft framework of conditions for their conduct.

The President of the Serbian Chamber of Commerce and Industry noted that the document is being signed "after direct contacts between competent institutions were renewed last year", and called the signing "a long-awaited step forward."

What stands between the statement and a real agreement

Ukraine is the only country in Europe with which Serbia has not signed a free trade agreement. The reason is not a lack of political will, but a structural problem: Serbia is still not a member of the WTO. The latest European Commission report directly indicates that the accession process has stalled primarily due to the lack of a GMO law that meets WTO requirements, and due to incomplete bilateral negotiations on market access with several members of the organization.

"Despite the crisis Europe is experiencing, it remains our key partner in foreign trade. But it is also important to open new markets"

— Serbia's Minister of Trade Jagoda Lazarevic, Serbian Monitor

For Serbia, the most attractive goods on the Ukrainian market in case of concluding an FTA could be fertilizers, polymers, electrical equipment, pharmaceuticals, rubber products, tires and auto parts — meaning the agreement could theoretically shift trade from a narrow exchange of raw materials to a greater quantity of processed goods from both sides.

Figures that explain the motivation

In 2025, Serbian exports to Ukraine amounted to 179.6 million euros, imports from Ukraine — 212.2 million euros, and total trade reached approximately 391.8 million euros. Ukraine's Ambassador to Serbia Oleksandr Lytvynenko, in an interview with Interfax-Ukraine, called this level "relatively low" and noted that an FTA could revive bilateral economic ties while organically fitting into the European integration of both countries.

What has been signed — and what is missing

The joint statement is a political signal, not a legal obligation. It contains no deadlines, no dispute resolution mechanism, and no answer to the key question: how will an agreement be structured with a country that is not a WTO member and does not have WTO-compliant GMO legislation — products that make up a significant share of Ukrainian agricultural exports.

  • Signed: joint statement on resuming negotiations
  • Not signed: free trade agreement, schedule of rounds, monitoring mechanism
  • Structural obstacle: Serbia outside the WTO, GMO law does not meet the organization's requirements
  • Trade volume: ~392 million euros per year — one of the lowest figures among Ukraine's neighbors in the region

If Belgrade does not adopt a WTO-compliant GMO law by the end of 2025, the current statement risks repeating the fate of the previous three — remaining an intention without a result.

Related

Latest

Business

EU Against Google: Why the Latest Fine Could Change More Than Previous Ones

# European Regulators Target Google Again — This Time Over Digital Markets Act Violations. What's Behind the Accusations and Why It Matters Beyond the Corporation European regulators have renewed their scrutiny of Google, this time focusing on alleged violations of the Digital Markets Act. The charges underscore Brussels' increasingly aggressive stance on big tech monopolies and what officials say are anticompetitive practices. The accusations center on how Google leverages its dominance across multiple digital services — from search to advertising to mobile platforms — to disadvantage competitors. Regulators claim the company is using its market power in ways that stifle innovation and limit consumer choice. The case carries significance far beyond Google itself. It signals how the EU is attempting to enforce its landmark Digital Markets Act, legislation designed to curb the gatekeeping power of tech giants. A potential penalty could set precedent for how other large technology companies face similar scrutiny. For consumers and smaller tech firms, the outcome could reshape the digital landscape by creating more room for competition. For Google, fines and operational restrictions could fundamentally alter its business model in Europe, the world's most stringent regulatory market. The case also reflects a broader geopolitical divide, with the EU pursuing a regulatory approach that contrasts sharply with the lighter-touch oversight favored in the United States.

May 26, 2026