Zoran Milanović secured a major victory in Croatia’s presidential election, winning 75% of the vote in the second round. His opponent, Dragan Primorac, managed only 25%, despite being backed by the ruling Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ).
The election outcome dealt a blow to HDZ just months ahead of local elections, undermining the belief that the party is able to mobilize regional cadres and clientelist networks under all circumstances. Milanović achieved victory in every region of the country, including traditionally conservative strongholds, creating a rare electoral map dominated by a shade of social-democratic red.
Read more: Croatia’s presidential race heads to second round
During the past two weeks, Milanović ran a campaign that reinforced some of his established positions, such as opposing the deployment of Croatian armed forces in the Ukraine war, while also broadening his critique on other fronts. Notably, he delivered a sharper denunciation of Primorac’s ties to Israel, asserting during a debate on public television that these connections involve mass murderers and “criminals like Itamar Ben-Gvir.”
With the Croatian government continuing its economic and military cooperation with Israel amid the ongoing genocide in Gaza, Milanović’s remark stands out as one of the few significant criticisms from a high-profile political figure in the country. However, it remains uncertain whether he will pursue this stance in the future or if it was merely a strategic move to attract left-wing voters.
Following the announcement of the results, Western mainstream media once again labeled Milanović as a populist pro-Russian and anti-European Union candidate, drawing on his previous criticisms of the EU’s approach to the war in Ukraine and introduction of sanctions on Russia. However, the reality is more complex. While Milanović has been outspoken against the Croatian government’s botched foreign policy, he has also shared chauvinistic views on migrant workers.
This is particularly troubling given the right-wing’s recent intensified promotion of the ‘great replacement theory,’ which has fueled xenophobia and racism, including through mainstream media channels. In this context, Milanović’s firebrand approach is fueling an ongoing drift towards more right-wing narratives, while at the same time representing a relevant critique of Croatia’s position in international relations.
The same incendiary discourse, including critiques of Prime Minister Andrej Plenković’s administration, ultimately secured Milanović’s victory. Yet, in his final speech, Milanović hinted at a willingness to adopt a less confrontational stance with the government during this mandate, provided the Plenković administration reciprocates. Judging by the reactions from HDZ headquarters on Sunday night—particularly the Prime Minister’s hostile comments to journalists—such a shift appears unlikely.