The Two Opposition Leaders on Serbia

At a time when the ruling regime, for the second time since the demonstrations on March 9 is on the brink of the abyss, the Democratic opposition in Serbia is, unfortunately, disunited. Experience teaches us that there can be no powerful democratic opposition in Serbia without the active cooperation and the unity of action between the two key opposition parties: the Serbian Revival Party and the Democratic Party. The vast majority of members of these two parties are desperate to achieve this unity of action and the cooperation of most of the municipal boards in these two parties is admirable. Unfortunately, some disagreement is evident in the top ranks of these two parties. I have always supported the cooperation with the Democratic Party.

If the split within the Democratic Party had not occured last autumn, we from the Serbian Revival Party and the National Democratic wing were planning to form a very tight unified stand with the Democrats as well as the common appearance at the elections. Unfortunately, the split within the Democratic Party has occured and that wing which supported the cooperation between the Democratic Party and the Serbian Revival Party became a minority, which has temporarily affected the relations between the SRP and the Democrats. The elections brought us closer together and SRP has done nothing contrary to that common goal. On March 9 we did not have a clearly unified stand. If we had, I am convinced that the regime would have been overthrown then. The regime was saved on March 9 thanks to the split between the SRP and the Democratic Party.

We owe our members and the democratic Serbia a thank you for the coordinated effort concerning the aims which are common to both parties. Our presidency has contacted the Executive board of the Democratic Party recently and they had a meeting without me. One of the conflicting points between the SRP and the Democratic Party concerns the strategy of action towards the ruling regime. We argue for the use of both parliamentary and non-parliamentary methods including, of course, the protest rallies and demonstrations, but the Democratic Party is not united in this view. Concerning the parliamentary involvement within the SRP, a fraction to which I also belong would like the opposition to leave the Parliament. It is up to our MPs to decide. If the opposition MPs were to hand back their mandates that would be the move which would force the regime to hold the emergency elections, since, in that case fifty seats would be vacated in Parliament and consequently it could not function.

But we are running a grave risk unless the television becomes independent since to initiate the new elections with the existing propaganda would mean that the people would be tricked once again. We have radical approach concerning the international involvement and we are in favour of seeking protection from the United Nations and the European Community. The rights of the opposition in Serbia have been greatly thwarted.

Dragoljub Micunovic, the president of the Democratic Party

Naturally we would like the opposition to be stronger, more numerous and better coordinated. But the wishes are one thing, the reality another. Unfortunately we have only two parties with any real clout, parties with infrastructure, boards, membership MPs etc. These are the Democratic Party and the Serbian Revival Party.

There are, of course, parties which more resemble movements. There are also a series of parties of symbolic importance. They have no real power: they have no members, or MPs neither do they command any real influence, regardless of the fact that their membership includes prominent personalities.

Some form of cooperation does exist but it is not enough. There is cooperation between the Democratic Party and the Serbian Revival Party in Parliament, we appear jointly at press conferences, there is also an arrangement concerning the local elections. This cooperation should be further encouraged.

Speaking of the United Democratic Opposition or the Democratic Opposition in Serbia it in a way exists and does not exist.

The idea concerning the organization of various civilian movements be they peace movements or ecological movements, hundreds of different democratic initiatives which are springing up etc. From such a wide opposition panel a more articulate opposition can be formed than by signing some protocols with the imaginary parties. Knowing the nature of certain parties or people for that matter rivalry, skirmishes and various disagreements, since the people are not united over a clear aim.

The front can not be formed against a single manor against a single party, but against a certain a certain order, the situation in society, against a certain way of life. The opposition should be gathered over a principle of positive formulation of everything that we would like to have as opposed to everything that we do have, and not only on the basis that "we don't want this". I fear that by sticking solely to the "we are against" motto we will stay on the sidelines again. The gravest mistake we made in the pre- election campaign was to torture ourselves with what we do not want. Most people do not want "this".

It would be advisable for the discussion of this kind to be started where we would articulate what kind of state we do want. If we wish to be serious about this , we would have to say what we want. We could give a maze of wishes on the subject "we will be in Europe in no time" and the like, but what is important now is for someone to say with what means and how quickly could this be done. If that is lacking and if it only represents a verbal aggression I am afraid that it will be more harmful to the opposition than beneficial. Verbal aggression is always an indication of weakness.

Contrary to frequent claims that the Democratic Party, allegedly, stifles the formation of a more closely united opposition, I can say that we have done more to achieve this than others. I do not wish for one party to be presented as wishing to give fiercer resistance to Milosevic than some other party and for some kind of yardstick to be introduced labelling the ones who are more "opposition oriented" as opposed to those who are "less opposition oriented".

I am absolutely opposed to the civil war. I think it solves nothing. The trouble we are now facing stems from the fact that our society was born in the civil war. No one can guarantee peaceful demonstrations today with 60 000 people since 30 000 of them would certainly be armed. I think that the ones who are against the use of the institutions such as the television, the Academy etc. are wrong. We, the Democratic Party have to be in the core of society. We have to make an effort to participate

in the life of this country. "March through the institutions" is the democratic way. We should not dispel with this method, but we should also encourage others to join us and we should exercise a democratic pressure for change. I am, however, not in favour of sticking to the institutions. We were not involved exclusively in the work of the institutions. We took part in all the meetings, all the activities surrounding the Terazije involvement. We took the lead in handling the injured...