Slovenia

The results of the project called ``The Slovenian Public Opinion 1994'' will soon be presented to the public in Slovenia. The outcome of this year's undertaking is interesting because some longterm comparisons can be drawn; the research of the Slovenian public opinion (that has been conducted continually since 1968 by the Center for public opinion of the Faculty of Political Science, and headed by Niko Toso) can boast of the longest tradition in this field on the entire territory of former Yugoslavia. 1,050 people have been polled this year.

The latest results indicate some interesting shifts of the public opinion. Those indicators that refer to nationalism and international intolerance are of most interest. Both nationalism and international intolerance are on the rise according to this year's results and in comparison to the last year. The researchers found that the cause of this lies in the changes in the social structure. The feeling of being endangered has grown primarily because of the war in Slovenia's surroundings, and an increasing realization that the presence of refugees in Slovenia will be a permanent problem. Only two years ago, at the height of the SerbCroat war, the research showed an unexpectedly high, almost euphoric solidarity with the refugees. Euphoria is now gone and solidarity gave way to aversion. The most crushing result is that as many as 20 per cent of polled citizens of Slovenia ``do not wish to have Jews as their neighbors'' (according to the data published by the Slovenian Statistical Almanac, only 36 people declared themselves as Jews in the 1991 census); although antiSemitism has not flared up in Slovenia until now, the latest results point to the power of stereotypes, where the experience of those polled is obviously irrelevant. The researchers explain such extreme nationalist and racist preconceptions to be a result of ``a determination

outside experience,'' which means that those polled shaped their attitude indirectly basing it on the shifts noted in other societies that are close to them, e.g. Austria, Germany, Italy.

Heightened ethnic sensitivity demonstrates itself in two ways: as aggressive nationalism (about 10 per cent of the population) and a lack of confidence most Slovenians showed towards their neighboring former ``brotherly'' Yugoslav peoples, whom most of those polled want to keep at a distance.

In some cases deliberate stressing of differences goes to ridiculous extremes. For example, when asked ``to what extend are the above mentioned peoples similar to the Slovenes,'' those polled said that they feel most similar to the Germans, then the Austrians, which are followed by the Swiss, the Czechs and the Slovaks. The Croats, Italians, Americans, Hungarians, Russians, Bosnians, and finally the Serbs and the Turks. On the other hand, when asked ``what languages they speak or understand'' those polled replied that almost 90 per cent of them either speak or understand SerboCroat, 45.1 per cent German, 37.3 per cent English, 17.2 Italian, 6.2 French and so forth. The irony is that because of a similar language and a number of years they lived together in the same state a large majority of the Slovenians either speak or understand the languages of the peoples they feel are most foreign to them. In the background of such radical answers there is an approval or disapproval of the way these peoples and states acted when Slovenia was fighting for its independence, i.e. a critical examination of the causes of the war.

The distance that the Slovenes have towards ``their brethren from the south'' is also reflected in their answers to the question ``who endangers Slovenia.'' Most of them believe that Croatia is the biggest threat to Slovenia (50.2 per cent), and then Serbia (46.6 per cent). The refugees represent the third biggest threat (30.2%), then Russia (27.3%) and Italy (16.2%) with whom Slovenia is currently at dispute over the Ossimo accords, and Austria (5%) that failed to fulfill (and probably never will) its obligations stipulated in Article 7 of the interstate agreement on protection of the Slovenian minority in Austria.

Finally, some positive vibes have been demonstrated concerning the living conditions, that have been subjected to criticism over the recent years. Most of those polled expect gradual improvement of their standard of living. Such assessments are partially confirmed by the reports of the increase of imports, curbing the rise of unemployment and the rise of direct foreign investments in Slovenia, which is how the loss of the former Yugoslav market can be compensated.