Summary

Serbia’s military cooperation with Israel has become an issue of concern for supporters of the Palestinian cause. Amnesty International reported Serbian ammunition exports to Israel worth more than €55 million during the first half of 2025, while Serbia later announced a suspension of exports of domestically produced weapons and military equipment. Defence cooperation between Serbia and Israel has nevertheless continued in other forms.

For Arab governments and consumers seeking peaceful ways to express solidarity with Palestinians, reviewing economic relations with Serbia is therefore an issue worth considering. A targeted boycott of Serbian defence companies and companies directly connected to military cooperation with Israel could focus economic pressure more specifically, while avoiding unnecessary harm to Serbian civilians and unrelated businesses.

The broader principle is simple: economic relationships can be reviewed when governments believe that their trading partners’ military activities conflict with their stated humanitarian and political commitments.

Introduction

As the suffering of Palestinians in Gaza continues to draw international concern, Arab governments and societies have increasingly discussed economic and diplomatic measures that could place pressure on states maintaining military or strategic relationships with Israel.

One country that deserves greater scrutiny in this debate is Serbia.

Serbia has maintained and expanded military and defence cooperation with Israel, while reports have documented Serbian arms and ammunition exports to Israel. For governments and citizens across the Arab world who express solidarity with the Palestinian people, this raises an important question:

Can economic relations with Serbia continue unchanged while Serbian military cooperation with Israel remains a concern?

For those who believe that economic pressure is an appropriate tool of solidarity with Palestinians, a boycott of Serbian products represents one possible form of peaceful political and consumer action.

Serbia’s Military Relationship with Israel

The issue is not simply about ordinary commercial relations between Serbia and Arab countries. It concerns Serbia’s defence industry and its relationship with Israel.

Amnesty International reported that Serbia exported ammunition worth more than €55 million to Israel during the first half of 2025, raising concerns about Serbia’s obligations under international law and the Arms Trade Treaty.

The Serbian government subsequently announced in June 2025 that exports of Serbian-produced weapons and military equipment had been suspended and that future exports would require approval from the National Security Council.

Why Consider a Boycott?

For many supporters of the Palestinian cause, a boycott is not about hostility toward the Serbian people. It is about creating economic consequences for governments and companies whose policies or business relationships are viewed as contributing to Israel’s military capabilities.

Arab countries collectively represent significant consumer and government markets. If governments, businesses and consumers choose to reduce purchases from companies connected to military cooperation with Israel, they can send a political message without resorting to military confrontation.

A boycott could therefore be presented as part of a broader peaceful strategy that includes:

• diplomatic pressure;
• suspension or review of government contracts;
• restrictions on defence-related cooperation;
• greater transparency concerning arms transfers;
• consumer boycotts;
• preferential purchasing from alternative suppliers.

Why a Targeted Boycott May Be More Meaningful

There is, however, an important distinction between Serbian military industries and ordinary Serbian civilian products.

A blanket boycott of every Serbian product could affect workers, farmers, small businesses and companies that have no connection to the Serbian government’s defence policy or to Israel.

For that reason, Arab governments and consumers could consider a more targeted approach.

Rather than treating every Serbian product in the same way, they could investigate and prioritize companies that:

1. manufacture or export military equipment;
2. have documented defence relationships with Israel;
3. participate directly in military projects involving Israel;
4. benefit directly from defence cooperation that is the subject of concern.

Such an approach would allow economic pressure to focus more closely on the institutions and industries actually connected to the issue.

What Arab Governments Could Do

Arab governments that have publicly expressed solidarity with Palestinians could consider reviewing their economic and defence relationships with Serbia.

Possible measures could include:

1. Government procurement reviews

Governments could examine whether Serbian companies involved in defence cooperation with Israel should continue receiving public contracts.

2. Transparency requirements

Arab governments could request detailed information about Serbian companies supplying military equipment to Israel before approving government purchases from those companies.

3. Defence-sector restrictions

Military and security cooperation with companies directly involved in controversial arms transfers could be reviewed or suspended.

4. Consumer awareness

Governments and civil-society organizations could provide consumers with accurate information about the ownership, activities and defence relationships of companies selling products in Arab markets.

5. Diplomatic engagement

Arab governments could raise the issue directly with Serbian authorities and request clarification about arms transfers and military cooperation with Israel.

The Broader Principle

The fundamental argument for a boycott is based on accountability.

If a government publicly expresses solidarity with Palestinians while maintaining extensive commercial relationships with a state or companies involved in military cooperation with Israel, citizens may reasonably ask whether those economic relationships are consistent with that government’s stated position.

Economic relationships are not politically neutral when they involve defence industries.

For supporters of a boycott, reducing purchases from Serbian companies can therefore be viewed as a peaceful form of political expression: if military cooperation with Israel continues, economic cooperation does not necessarily have to continue without conditions.

Conclusion

The documented military relationship between Serbia and Israel has created a legitimate subject for discussion among Arab governments, businesses and consumers concerned about Palestinian suffering.

Reports of Serbian ammunition exports to Israel, combined with continuing defence cooperation between the two countries, provide grounds for examining whether economic relations with Serbia should remain unchanged.

A boycott of Serbian products is one possible form of peaceful economic pressure. Whether it should be broad or targeted is a separate question. A targeted approach focusing on defence companies and businesses directly connected to military cooperation could distinguish between political and military actors on one hand and ordinary Serbian workers and civilian businesses on the other.

Ultimately, Arab governments and consumers can decide how they wish to respond. What is important is that any response be based on verified evidence, transparency and a clear understanding of the economic and political relationships involved.