"NIN" interview 

(11 April 1997) 

   Quite a few potential candidates have already registered their interest in the forthcoming presidential elections in Serbia. They all have a similar political platform. They all count on the support of domestic forces. Should there be a referendum on the issue of the monarchy before the election date is announced, thus solving a historic dilemma of the Serbian people? 

- I was almost afraid you would include me among the "potential candidates". We would need only that on top of everything! The holding of a referendum on the issue of the monarchy before the elections would be, in my opinion, the height of political madness. Leaving aside for the moment the question of whether a referendum is the best and the most democratic way of establishing the will of the people on such an essential issue, I think that to hold a referendum now would be, in fact, a negation of the democratic process. Such a referendum would be similar to those held during recent years in various parts of the former Yugoslavia, in which the voters had a very unclear idea of the implications of their vote. It is clear that the will of the people cannot be established through a referendum of this sort. 

For holding genuine referendum there must exist certain specific conditions, above all, the rule of law and democratic institutions. These conditions do not exist in our country today. What is also needed is a legal procedure that stimulates the time scale for the referendum and the rules of play. Each referendum is preceded by a longish public debate on the subject of the referendum, and this presupposes the complete freedom and impartiality of the media. Do you really think that the present government can and would want to ensure such conditions? Any referendum, which the Milosevic administration may organise on the issue of monarchy, would result in falsifying the peopleÕs will. I think this is clear. 

Another point is whether the issue of the restoration of an illegally abolished monarchy can and should be solved through a referendum. Let me be clear, I have always respected and will always bow to the will of the people. Kings reign "by the grace of God and the will of the people", and I am a democrat par excellence (translatorÕs note: literally "from heel to head"), and in the family I have the example of King Peter I which I would like to follow. 

However, the question remains of whether it is better to decide on such fateful issue through a referendum or through decisions of a freely elected constituent assembly. How to ensure that the real will of the people is asserted? This is a question that leading politicians will have to tackle one day and make a decision that I shall certainly respect, but I do believe personally that a referendum is not an adequate instrument for making such an important historic decision. You know, king represents the continuity of the people, not just present but also past and future generations, and one should not put him to a vote in a referendum which reflects the momentary mood of only those people who have cast their vote in it. The true will of the people would find a clearer expression through the decisions of a constituent assembly elected in free elections and after an all-national debate on merits and demerits of the monarchy and republic. A constituent assembly would not have to be in a hurry to make decisions but would do so after a meticulous and rational scrutiny and debate, and assisted by constitutional experts. Such a decision of the constituent assembly would be equally democratic as a referendum, as Dr Vojin Dimitrijevic recently pointed out in an interview with "NIN" correspondent. 

Mr Vuk Draskovic has stated publicly that "if elected, he would be president with the shortest tenure" and that he would work in favour of the establishment of the monarchy. That would certainly be an original way of restoring the monarchy through presidential elections. What do you think about that possibility? 

- I welcome Mr DraskovicÕs advocacy of the monarchy, in the same way as i am happy about the support for the monarchy given by members of many other parties, and especially by the wide strata of the population and people not affiliated to any party. I hope that one day a huge majority of citizens of Serbia and Montenegro will realise the advantages the monarchy would bring to the people. I would also like to stress the King, as a symbol of national unity, must be king to all the citizens of his country, including those who are not monarchists. I constantly stress this point because the monarchy must be the guarantee of freedoms and human rights of all citizens regardless of their political affiliation, religion and nationality. It is necessary to comprehend finally that we are not living in the Middle Ages but on the threshold of the third millennium! And as regards Mr DraskovicÕs statement, it is really not up to me top comment on it. 

How would the return of the monarchy affect the relations with Montenegro, which is part of the FR of Yugoslavia, relations with Republika Srpska and the existence of FR of Yugoslavia? 

- You have raised a major and important question, and I am grateful to you for it. You know, I have always loved the heroic Montenegro and respected her greatest son ­ the immortal Njegos, and ­ as I said on another occasion ­ in my veins runs also the blood of her national dynasty ­ the Petrovices. I think the separation of Montenegro from Serbia would be a big tragedy and a great loss for all of us. I am convinced that, in conditions of democracy, solutions will be found as well as the common interest. 

The existence of Republika Srpska, i.e. of the Serbian people in Bosnia, is an essential interest of all the Serbs although some politicians in Serbia do not see this. Though its statehood is limited, Republika Srpska is an internationally recognised entity and, as such in a position to defend and advocate Bosnian Serb interests, vis-à-vis the world, as well as those of huge number of refugees who have found shelter in it. Its future existence will depend a great deal on the nature of its future relations with the mother country, with Belgrade, and we all know that we cannot rely on the official Belgrade. 

Personally, I think the monarchy would be an ideal solution for Serbia, Montenegro and Republika Srpska. I am not a constitutional expert, but donÕt you think it would be good if Karadjordjevic dynasty through a personal union linked these three countries, each of them with a specific history, different traditions, distinctive culture and sovereignty, but all of them linked by blood, language and religion, and most importantly, by the feeling of a common destiny? Such a solution would also be the guarantee to numerous non-Serbs who live in the area, that their rights and freedom would totally be safeguarded and protected. All the Serbs and other citizens, gathered together around the Crown as a symbol of unity, would then have a splendid opportunity for successful development and all-round progress in the new conditions created by the break-up of Yugoslavia. Do you see perhaps any other solution that would offer such benefits? 

Last Tuesday some Belgrade dailies published your forged letter to his Holiness patriarch Pavle. How do you comment on the publication of this lie in "Politika", "Demokratija" and "Dnevni Telegraf"? 

- As my Chancellery has already stated, I believe behind this is a regime "kitchen" in Belgrade, whose task is to discredit the idea of monarchy and me personally, as well as undermine the reputation of the Serbian Orthodox Church and her wise leader, His Holiness patriarch Pavle. You know, things like this do not happen by accident. The "Kitchen", which put this repugnant lie into circulation, knew what it was doing. It used phrases from some of my earlier messages to make the alleged letter as convincing as possible, and then added "spice" by including various disgusting fabrications of which even Gabbles would have been proud. This "open letter" was an integral part of a systematic campaign that the regime has been conducting for a long time now against the monarchy and me personally, and by which unfortunately even non-regime papers have been occasionally taken in. 

Within the framework of this campaign a special place is occupied by those who criticise me because of my inadequate knowledge of Serbian. LetÕs make this clear, I accept well-meaning criticism and I am aware that my knowledge of Serbian is not yet sufficiently good, but what we have here is not well-meaning criticism but a systematic attempt at ridicule with the intention of compromising the idea of usefulness of monarchy in the minds of people, instead of encouraging the public to ask themselves why I did not have the opportunity of learning Serbian better. But great many people know that I would speak Serbian fluently now if I did not become an exile from my own country by a decision of the communist administration, a decision that has not been revoked to this very day. Doing us a terrible historic injustice, Josip Broz and associates banned my family and me from our homeland, while TitoÕs defective knowledge of Serbo-Croatian did not prevent the spiritual fathers of my contemporary critics to extol his name to the stars! I am doing my best to improve my knowledge of Serbian, but I do think it is more important that I genuinely have the wellbeing of our people at heart in contrast to the past and present communist potentates. 

I frequently ask myself why is the regime using this campaign against me and the monarchy instead of trying to find solutions to the terrible crisis into which it had pushed the Serbian people. It is difficult to give a clear answer to this question but i would guess that it is afraid of the idea of monarchy since this idea is close to the people and it suits their psyche. 

And another point: our press should pay attention that it does not become a tool of regime misinformation, however unwittingly. It was rather irresponsible to publish my alleged letter to patriarch Pavle without the editors making the slightest attempt to verify its authenticity in advance. And one ­ once most respected Belgrade daily ­ not only published that fabrication but also accompanied it by its commentary! This is all rather sad and does not do honour to anybody. 
 
 

BORISAV VASIC