Election Blues

After the latest information that around 300 judges have left the judiciary, the Serbian Ministry of Justice is trying to persuade the remaining judges, dissatisfied with salaries of 20 DM, that ``someone'' wishes to destabilize a state governed by law. The Yugoslav Assembly has practically been dissolved, and the deputies are trying in vain to schedule a session of the Chamber of Citizens.

Serbian Renewal Movement (SPO) leader Vuk Draskovic is touring Serbia on foot and listening to his followers describe the situation they are living in. A peasant in the heart of Serbia told him: ``If they, the Socialist, win again, will eat each other up alive.''

The poverty, chaos, looting, corruption, banishment, crimes, refugee lives, general deprivation, an impoverished 90% of the population, loss of moral credibility, a situation in which buying a pair of socks affects the family budget, a situation in which it remains a mystery in which decade the war will end, a mass feeling of loneliness, sorrow, depression, rejection, sadness, dejection, lowness of spirits, forlorness, moodiness, melancholy, gloominess, listlessness, breakdown and poverty are officially presented as the ``successful implementation of the national program.''

The ruling Socialist Party of Serbia (SPS) seems to have estimated that in a situation such as this, they don't stand much of a chance at winning the elections, even if it results in the mass staying way from the polls, and in spite of the opposition being disunited. Under the slogan of caring about the regularity of the elections, they are trying to ban the publication of preelection surveys which are not published only during the period of preelection silence. In choosing their campaign slogan the SPS opted for the nationalist ``For Serbia!.'' By choosing the word ``pride,'' the Socialists are trying to cash in on nationalist rhetoric for the third time. The SPS tell ``a proud people,'' living beneath all limits of human dignity that world powerbrokers are responsible for their plight. Vuk Draskovic, currently one of the regime's most ardent critics describes this kind of psychology with the following words: ``If you ask them why there is no milk, they will say that the cows are to blame.''

In an atmosphere such as this, it was to be expected that Serbian President Slobodan Milosevic would hold a campaign speech in Geneva, and in fact reiterate his interview with the nine editorsinchief of the leading media in Serbia, and that he would behave as arrogantly as if this was Europe of 1618 when conflicts started between German Protestants and Catholics, and served as an introduction to the Thirty Years' War in which all European countries were involved, and which ended in 1648. Milosevic behaves as if he is stopping their Thirty Years' War, and not as if they are trying to stop his war.

Milosevic criticized the participants of the Geneva Conference of behaving according to the ``law of the stronger,'' ``of violating UN resolutions,'' of aiding Moslems so that they ``could win the war they had lost,'' of ``revenge for an aggression we have not done,'' which all added up to what he hoped was the ``last genocide in this century.'' Milosevic underscored that Europeans would find it ``hard to explain to their children why they were killing our children.''

It would seem that Milosevic wished to submit a demand for the immediate lifting of sanctions, but the tone he used implied that he wished to be turned down. Part of the opposition pushed him towards an unyielding stand. Democratic Party of Serbia (DSS) leader Vojislav Kostunica said that negotiations should not be attended until sanctions were lifted.

Milosevic wished to present certain signs of understanding for Belgrade's humanitarian problems as his victory, practically pushing Europe's frustrated diplomats into tightening the screws even more.

On November 12 Milosevic said that ``sanctions could not last long.'' This was repeated recently by former president of the Serbian Assembly Zoran Arandjelovic, who is convinced that ``sanctions are being eased slowly.'' It was known that the UN Committee for the implementation of sanctions had postponed, on November 4, the issuing of permits for the import of Russian gas to Yugoslavia, but that this option was still in the game; that a third delivery of medicine sponsored by the Soros Foundation had arrived on November 10; that a load humanitarian aidmedicine had been loaded onto trucks in Germany, in mid November. Official propaganda hid all these facts, at the same time hypocritically condemning aid given by independent foundations to the independent media. It was necessary to bolster the President's Geneva thesis of a war against three million Serbian children.

There are no signs that Milosevic's speech made any impression in Geneva. Lord Owen said laconically that he had not understood what Milosevic had said. In the complicated tangle of relationships, and the doldrums in which peace talks are stuck, economic sanctions against Serbia remain Europe's strongest card against Serbia. Western public opinion is being accused of ``the West's moral indifference'' by the Bosnian lobby, and the fact that sanctions are deeply affecting the life and overall national perspective in Serbia, as concluded recently by some foreign media.

European diplomats have tried to persuade leaders of the former Yugoslavia to adopt a responsible stand with regard to the fate of their compatriots. British Foreign Secretary Douglas Hurd cautioned the negotiators in Geneva and said that the United Nations would not feed, clothe and protect the victims of the war in Bosnia indefinitely if their leaders did not wish to reach a compromise. According to US estimates, as many as 4,250,000 people of the former Yugoslavia have been directly affected by the civil war, winter and a refugee fate. There are no signs that national leaders comprehend the depths of the catastrophe they are lording it over, and all behave as if they have nothing to lose.

Milosevic is viewed as an influential ``warlord'' and the bills sent to him reach us.

All opposition parties criticized Milosevic's Geneva speech as a faux pas. Vuk Draskovic was very sharp: ``He has stuck a needle in the eye of the whole world again. At a time when Serbia should be helped out of the international jail into which it has been pushed by this regime, Milosevic continues with his old policy of defiance, showing that he is a hero, and that he has the whole world at his feet...''

Draskovic believes that Milosevic should be asked some other questions: ``Does he personally suffer from sanctions? How do his children live under sanctions? How do his ministers live? Have they become rich and fat thanks to sanctions?'' Draskovic claims that Milosevic should be asked how many children could have been clothed and fed with the money that his regime has transferred to Cyprus, and from there to Moscow... Serbia's cooperation with regard to Bosnia should be measured with a new 3% of territory which should be returned to the Moslems, with respect for the United Nations' mission, a peace agreement with Croatia, a solution in Kosovo (Serbian province with a majority ethnic Albanian population) and with trials of war criminals. It is clear that the authorities here would be hard put to comply with this list. The first session of the International Court for War Crimes has been scheduled for January 17, 1994 and comes before the constitution of the new Serbian Assembly in Belgrade which will, the way things stand, be entered once again by Zeljko Raznatovic Arkan (currently head of Party of Serb UnitySSJ) and some others listed by the court in the Hague under ``Wanted.'' Judging by statements made before the latest unsuccessful round of talks in Geneva, Lord Owen continues to urge for pressures against all three sidesif the Bosnian Serbs do not agree to a reasonable agreement, Europe can introduce new sanctions; if the Moslems don't agree, then the Western governments could start thinking about whether to send or withdraw their troops from Bosnia.

A feeling of weariness and preparations to admit the de facto situation can be read between the lines. Western analysts have complained that the latest proposal gives Milosevic a chance of winning the elections, noting with reserve that he ``isn't the worst thing that could happen to his country'' (The Washington Post). Milosevic, and not Yugoslav President Zoran Lilic is being called to Geneva and Milosevic's influence is being praised. In this way it is being suggested that Belgrade and Banja Luka belong to the same state, but the recognition of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia is being avoided.

Lord Owen said recently that the socalled bodybag, a plastic bag with a zip in which corpses are carried, was the measure according to which US public opinion decided whether US troops should intervene or not.

It is the negotiators' job now to prepare the public. Lord Owen was of the opinion that Europe feared a new, independent and predominantly Moslem state in Bosnia, recalling that Islam had been present in Europe through the centuries via Spain, where the Moslems lived for hundreds of years until they were expelled after a series of bloody conflicts in the 15th century. Lord Owen said further that atrocious things have been done to the Moslems in Bosnia and we owed them a safe bit of the European continent. The majority of politicians in Serbia view the partitioning of Bosnia as Milosevic's victory, disregarding the very high price paid by both Moslems and Serbs. Vuk Draskovic is one of the rare politicians in Serbia who continues to claim that this is defeat and calls for a reconciliation with the Moslems.

Local cartographers with very short memories are now quietly gloating over the recognition of the de facto situation, and give Milosevic the ``war victor'' an advantage at elections. When, in the future, the consequences of Bosnia's partitioning become visible, (if this state does come into being, then a revanchist attitude towards Serbia can be expected), the complications will again be ascribed to ``antiSerbian stands,'' even though the Serbs themselves are responsible for the realization of the project, some with pencils, some with papers, some with guns and some knives.

The former Yugoslavia recently marked two anniversaries November 29Republic Day and December 1Unification Day (when the Kingdom of Serbs, Croats and Slovenes was created in 1918). The holidays were not mentioned officially, but no one worked. But then again, no one does anymore.