|
At the time of writing (the end of May), the political scene in Serbia looks very bleak. The Milosevic regime has unleashed a new wave of repression and aggression by taking over the few remaining independent media in Belgrade and persecuting members of the student resistance movement “Otpor”, which is perceived by the regime as a very serious threat. Branding “Otpor” activists as “fascists” and “terrorists”, the authorities are planning to introduce new “anti-terrorist” legislation with “Otpor” as its chief target. These latest moves by the Milosevic’s regime are an indication of its determination to cling to power at any cost. They show both the weakness and the strength of its present position. On the one hand, the regime is becoming increasingly worried about the rising tide of popular discontent, and on the other, its determination to stay in power is undiminished and its control of over the state apparatus and the media appears to be absolute. The response of Serbia’s opposition to the media clampdown had been confused, to say the least. Speaking generally, its unity is fragile and it has failed so far to translate the people’s desire for change into effective action The initial reaction of opposition activists to the take-over of the popular radio and TV station “Studio B” in Belgrade was fierce and they vented their fury in open anti-government street protests. For two days the police brutally confronted the demonstrators and there were street clashes with many people being beaten up, injured and detained. A wave of anger spread all over the country with protest rallies being organised not only in Belgrade but also in all provincial cities. In Belgrade, protest soon fizzled out. This was partly in response to police brutality and partly because of the apparent inability of opposition leaders to give a decisive lead to the activists thus failing to put pressure on the authorities to accept opposition demands. Instead of making it quite clear to the authorities that the ordinary citizens will not tolerate further inroads on the freedom of speech, the opposition leaders sent out confused signals and the protestors grew disheartened as a result. The collapse of the protest was also due to the increasing disillusionment among ordinary citizens with the opposition leaders` failure to provide a viable alternative to the regime. The resulting apathy among the voters was also a contributory factor. All this is indicative of the malaise that seriously affects Serbian politics and Serbian society. Serbia and Yugoslavia are experiencing not only all the negative effects felt by almost all post-communist societies in Eastern Europe but also the catastrophic consequences of the break up of the old Yugoslavia. There is a feeling of insecurity and fear of change. Last year’s deplorable Nato bombing made things only worse and its net result was a strengthening of Milosevic’s position and a weakening of the democratic forces demanding radical changes internally and externally. Feeling it was my duty as a Karadjordjevic to help the democratic process in Serbia, I have convened since November 1999 three important opposition conferences with the aim of speeding up Milosevic’s departure thus opening the way to radical democratic reforms in Serbia. The first of these took place in Budapest last November and it brought together not only representatives of the Serbian political opposition but also distinguished figures from Serbia’s public life, including the Serbian Church, as well as a number of leading personalities from the Serbian diaspora in the West. The Budapest conference was credited with providing the final impetus to Serbia’s opposition parties to reach an agreement on joint action, which was finally signed in Belgrade on 10 January 2000. Although far from perfect, this agreement has provided a basis for joint action against the regime for the first time since the collapse of the “Zajedno” opposition coalition in early 1997. The second gathering was in Banja Luka in January during my visit to the Republika Srpska (RS) at the invitation of Premier Milorad Dodik. This was on a smaller scale and consisted of consultations with a number of opposition leaders from Serbia, as well as talks with RS leading figures such as the former President Mme Biljana Plavsic. One of the concrete results of the Banja Luka talks was the RS Government’s promise of help and support for Serbia’s democratic opposition. Incidentally, I had similar assurances of support for the democratic opposition from President Milo Djukanovic of Montenegro when I met him in Podgorica, Montenegro, in June 1999 before I visited Kosovo. All these efforts culminated in the conference I convened in Athens from 21 to 23 April this year. The attendance of important opposition figures from Serbia was the best ever; representatives of the Serbian Church, NGOs, trade unions, various institutions, youth groups such “Otpor” and others also took an active part. The Serbian Patriarch Pavle sent a message of support saying that “we must go into Europe and join the contemporary processes” and telling the delegates of his hope that “unity will be victorious over disunity, love over hatred and creative energy over destructive forces”. In this connection, it is worth pointing out an interesting comment on the Athens conference published in the independent Belgrade weekly “NIN” on 27 April. Referring to my often publicly stated position that “we must crown democracy first” and only then deal with other outstanding problems in Serbia and Yugoslavia, the magazine stressed that this formula had enabled even the “sworn anti-monarchists, former communists and republicans” to clearly respond to my call and made it possible for the “anti-royalists and convinced atheists and agnostics in the ranks of the Serbian opposition” to declare themselves in favour of the Crown and the Church as the “undisputed moral authorities in a Serbia tired of the destruction of all its moral and social values”. This comment confirmed my belief that my role is to act as a rallying point for democracy and unity and as a catalyst for democratic change in my country. There was also an important international aspect to the Athens conference since it provided evidence that the Greek official policy now openly supports Serbia’s democratic opposition. The address delivered at the opening session by Mr. Alex Rondos, the senior adviser to Foreign Minister George Papandreou, was a clear signal to the Milosevic regime that it can no longer rely on support from Greece. The fate of Serbia and Yugoslavia clearly depends on whether the Serbian people and other citizens of Yugoslavia manage to get rid of the Milosevic regime in the not too distant future. It depends also on the help and understanding that the international community and Serbia’s friends abroad show for the cause of democracy in Yugoslavia. Our destiny must be in our own hands. The opposition political parties must unite for democracy and become organized along the lines “One Nation for Democracy”, but even that is not enough. What Serbia needs is a broad nation-wide movement for change and democracy, something on the lines of the Polish “Solidarity” which was instrumental in bringing the communist system down and opening the way to a peaceful transition to democracy. Perhaps “Otpor” may grow into such a movement? The fact is that Serbia needs a powerful pro-democracy movement in order to remove the present regime in a peaceful manner and to start building a better future. There will be no stability in the Balkans until Serbia becomes free and democratic. So it is quite clear that it is in Europe’s self-interest to help promote democracy in Serbia and reintegrate the Serbs and all other citizens of Yugoslavia into European and world institutions. There is no hope for Serbia until the Milosevic regime is removed but the international community must understand that Serbian democrats and the entire Serbian nation need support and reassurance. They need to be reassured about the territorial integrity of their state, which includes Kosovo. Should Yugoslavia’s territory shrink further, the existing feeling of insecurity, vulnerability and fear will increase and this will provide a fertile ground for extremists to stir up trouble. Reassurance is also needed with firm guarantees about the fate of the Serbs in the areas of what used to be Yugoslavia, particularly in Republika Srpska and parts of Croatia. So while it is up to the Serbs to take destiny into their own hands,
the international community can help greatly by showing it is even-handed
in its approach to the Balkan nations. The UN and European Union
sanctions against Serbia should be reviewed and those that hurt the ordinary
people, while benefiting the mafia regime must be lifted. There must
be more contact between the people of Serbia and Europe. If the regime
in Belgrade wants the Serbs to live in a ghetto, the international community
must do nothing to help build the walls around that ghetto!
Although the situation in Serbia may look grim now, changes for the better are inevitable if we work patiently and persistently for democracy. It is a fact that the regime is doomed and Milosevic knows it but fights back since he has no other option. I am optimistic and know that democracy and the rule of law will prevail. All citizens of Yugoslavia irrespective of their ethnic origin, religion or race deserve a decent life, security and freedom. There is a long democratic tradition in Serbia and people will simply refuse to put up with this dictatorship in the long term. All this is not going to be easy, but I am convinced that democracy will triumph. The citizens of Serbia are proud people and they will recover from the present setbacks. 31 May 2000 ---
|
|
|