As part of the program Regional Initiative for combating disinformation “Western Balkans Combatting disinformation Center: Exposing malicious influences through fact-checking and Analytical Journalism“, we present you a new analysis of fake news and disinformation narratives.
It’s clear who’s to blame for NIS: Many now want to “target” Moscow and break Serbia-Russia ties
Sanctions against the Petroleum Industry of Serbia (NIS) came into effect on October 9. After being postponed eight times over the previous few months, the United States finally imposed sanctions on NIS, a company majority-owned by the Russian state-owned Gazprom and its subsidiaries.
The majority stake in NIS was sold to the Russian state company in 2008, while the Republic of Serbia retained a minority share. Since the beginning of Russia’s aggression against Ukraine in 2022, there had been speculation about the possible introduction of sanctions against all companies in the energy sector—both oil and gas—that are majority Russian-owned and operate in European countries.
The outgoing Biden administration announced in January 2025 that U.S. sanctions would be imposed on the Petroleum Industry of Serbia (NIS), after which the U.S. Treasury Department under the Trump administration postponed their enforcement until the second week of October. During that period, despite ongoing negotiations, no adequate solution was found to remove the reasons for sanctioning NIS, which would have required the termination of the Russian ownership share in the company.
The sanctions against NIS directly threaten Serbia’s energy security, as they call into question the country’s oil and petroleum supply, while also negatively affecting the national economy, in which NIS represents one of the central pillars. The persistent intransigence of the Russian side—according to statements by certain officials as well as findings from investigative media—its unwillingness to compromise or sell its ownership share at a time when Serbia is facing a potentially severe energy crisis, has resulted in sharp criticism of Russia within parts of the Serbian public, even among circles close to the government.
In domestic pro-Russian media, on the other hand, reporting has been focused on justifying the Russian position regarding NIS and promoting anti-Western narratives. An illustrative example is an article published by the Serbian portal of the Russian state outlet Sputnik, titled “It’s Clear Who’s to Blame for NIS: Many Now Want to ‘Target’ Moscow and Break Serbia-Russia Ties.”
The article states that “the American sanctions against NIS have given many in Serbia an excuse to fire a few poisoned arrows toward Russia, to question our bilateral relations, and to reverse the narrative—making the sanctioned party guilty instead of the one imposing the sanctions.” Sputnik’s interlocutors claim that “the Americans have tried to shift the burden of responsibility for the sanctions on NIS onto Russia, while presenting themselves as supposedly well-intentioned toward us.”
The text adds that “it would be best for both us and Russia to reach a mutually satisfactory solution,” noting that “Russia has a broader spectrum of issues in its relations with America.” Sputnik’s interlocutors further emphasize that Serbia “is doomed to navigate between winds blowing from all directions… (but) not all of them are ill-intentioned—for instance, Russia is our historical ally.” The article concludes that “the Americans may have overplayed their hand—they expected Russia to use Serbia’s weakened position to bind it even more tightly through additional pressure, but that did not happen.”
The piece on Sputnik Srbija relativizes the previously uncompromising stance of the Russian side in negotiations over possible solutions for NIS—something that even certain Serbian government officials have acknowledged—while completely ignoring the use of the (new) gas arrangement issue as a direct instrument of open Russian pressure on Serbia.
Author: Igor Mirosavljević
