Cool-Headed, For a Change

Since in mid-1993 Serbia's president all of a sudden fell in love with peace and abandoned the alliance with the Serbian radicals, Serbian Radical Party leader Vojislav Seselj has been repeating that it is only a matter of time when Slobodan Milosevic will be overthrown. Time seems to have dragged and Vojislav Seselj is entering a new election campaign, telling the same story about Milosevic. There is a counter-fact that could be his consolation -many people foretold Seselj's imminent political death as soon as he broke off with Milosevic and yet he is politically very much "alive."

The radicals' leader is certainly one of the most controversial personalities on Serbia's political scene. He says he is the "least spontaneous politician" and that he works everything out in advance. His political opponents, however, say that he is too spontaneous. While Seselj sees himself as an extremely rational politician, his opponents see him as the man who always takes the same direction especially in national politics "whatever it may cost." Seselj sees himself as an "extremely well-informed politician." Others say he used to be well-informed while he was on good terms with the police.

Like the rest of the opposition, Seselj is going to the elections scheduled for the end of this year with the 3:0 score for the socialists. The socialists won one of these victories with the help of the radicals - while they were on the same team.

"We were never on the same team," SRS leader Vojislav Seselj said in his interview to "Vreme." "We always opposed the socialists and kept attacking the Socialist Party of Serbia (SPS), but we supported Milosevic's patriotic policy. The moment he made a turn, we attacked him."

VREME: SPS spokesman Ivica Dacic recently said the elections would be held this autumn. He also said it would be easy for the socialists with the opposition like this one...

Seselj: "The socialists are weaker than ever. Ivica Dacic cannot be fully trusted when he is speaking about the date of the elections. His statement is only a trial balloon. We were convinced the socialists would schedule elections immediately after Dayton. It seemed the most rational. They, however, did not settle internal relations in their party and did not dare go into elections. The socialists can surprise the opposition by announcing elections when the opposition is not ready. We, certainly, won't be unprepared. Besides, the socialists will have to announce elections on all levels."

Why would they hurry with republican elections when they can wait till next year when the elections are due anyway?

Because there are negotiations about whether (ethnic) Albanians will go into elections. Milosevic made some promises in Dayton and he will try to implement them here. If the Albanians are in the elections, then elections have to be held on all levels, the republican and federal. Milosevic is at the same time trying to complete the Constitution and to adopt it and then go into federal elections because he cannot once again be Serbia's presidential candidate. He is making calculations now with the Democratic Party of Socialists of Montenegro (DPS CG) and he seems to have taken them under his control. He is also behind the removal of all radical MP's from the Montenegro Parliament. He possesses information against Milo Djukanovic, Bulatovic, Marovic and other DPS leaders. Former state security chief Bojovic literally fled from Montenegro to Serbia, bringing along the data about all the affairs that went on in Montenegro. That lot there wouldn'd dare move.

Until recently, there were talks about a joint opposition list for the elections. You were the first to get out of it.

Someone is very successfully ascribing to the opposition a story about the issues which simply are not current and it is not wise to raise such issues. Talks about tight unification have always caused conflicts within the opposition. For example, Djindjic comes up with the initiative that the two democratic parties should be united, which should be the most natural thing, and he is immediately showered with hatred from the Democratic Party of Serbia. Besides, why a joint opposition list if the election law remains the same? If the socialists impose a new election law based on the principle of majority, then we shall all try to go together. There is no point in doing it now.

Cooperation between opposition parties must be taken much more seriously. What other opposition parties have been doing in the past few years is terrible. It must never happen again.

So you are against one list and one leader?

The opposition does not need one leader. Whoever tries to impose himself as the leader destroys the opposition. Neither Draskovic nor Djindjic can be the leaders of the opposition. We never wanted such a role. The opposition must cooperate on healthy basis. We Radicals are willing to cooperate with only three opposition parties - Serbian Renewal Movement (SPO), DS and DSS.

What kind of cooperation between the opposition parties is at all possible? On what issues?

We intend to offer the signing of an agreement between these four opposition parties. This would bind us to never and under no condition enter a coalition with the socialists. And never to support in the Parliament an act initiated by the socialists. We shall see if this will come true. We have to carry it out, almost as a vow. If we do not achieve this, it means some of us are calculating and trading with the socialists. The radicals had a very negative experience in January 1994. The opposition was together then and we could have overthrown the socialists. We could have at least forced Milosevic to dismiss the Parliament and organize elections for a new one. And then New Democracy (ND) betrayed us and gave four votes to the socialists. And to give them another chance now? Never. There are other examples of the betrayal of opposition interests. We, radicals, have good memory. When I say this, they tell me: "And what about the times when you cooperated with Milosevic." That's true, but when I cooperated with Milosevic I did cooperate with no opposition party. I observed our agreements, Milosevic violated them.

You recently said that the parallel parliament was not enough, that the opposition must "go out into the streets again, but wisely." What is "wise going out into the street?"

This practically means that we are ready for political struggle outside the parliament, but without violence. Even if the police applied violence, we would remain calm. To sustain the beating. Like we did last summer in Gnjilane. Everything had been planned, to make it look like a conflict caused by the radicals and then they realized that we offered no resistance, that we had no guns. The plot backfired. And if it backfired in Gnjilane it is even more likely to backfire in Belgrade where everything will be happening before the cameras of foreign TV stations. Draskovic does not agree, he says: "If the police use force, we shall reply with force." Perhaps he can accomplish everything in that way but we are not ready for it.

So you are for Gandhian methods?

This is where we are for Gandhian methods because if we bring enough people out in the streets, these methods will win. If we do not bring enough people in the streets, it means the situation has not yet matured for the change.

This year's elections should be the first ones in which "economists" and not "mappists" will play the main role. There is no more making of the national state, no more "dignity to be given back to people."

You ought to be aware that the socialists have won all the elections so far as nationalists. The socialist and leftist ideas don't sell in Serbia. The starting point in Serbia is the national idea. Milosevic has won all the elections so far as a nationalist and a patriot and not as a socialist, leftist and non-communist. These are the facts.

The national moment will be very important in the next elections, too, and that's where the socialists will lose most.

The national, economic and social moments will, in a way, be equal in the forthcoming campaign, perhaps even the economic and social moments will have a slight advantage. But even those social issues are related to the national issue, the problem of refugees. As for the economic issues, the socialists are very weak. They have already launched a campaign on the state-controlled television in order to convince the people that things have started improving, but they haven't. And they will not improve any time soon, because the socialists will get no foreign financial aid.

But they can bring back the money from Cyprus.

Hardly, because most of that money is in private accounts. They will start fleeing abroad one by one. And they will keep that money. Who will make Mirko Marjanovic and Radoman Bozovic return all that they have stolen.

But they might arrest a few managers ahead of the elections to show how successfully they are fighting against criminals.

That is quite possible, but is a only a short-term credit. They are more likely to give people their pensions, raise salaries. The people will think that it's getting better, and in fact, it will be even worse.

Many people think that peace in Bosnia is not in the interest of the radicals.

That's not true. Did you hear Alija Izetbegovic the other day when he said he thought Seselj's chetniks had the best chances in the elections in the Bosnian Serb Republic. And that is the Serbian Radical Party. Besides, there is no lasting peace in Bosnia. The example of Bosnia has proved that the radicals have been right during this war. Since 1990 we have been warning about the dangers that threaten us and have been making suggestions as to what should be done. This is why the people in the Bosnian Serb Republic respect us.

Will you go against Karadzic in the elections in the Bosnian Serb Republic?

We shall be competition to everyone and after the elections we shall see who we can cooperate with, who to go in coalition with. We certainly won't go into a coalition with the socialists and the communists. There is no coalition prior to elections.

Speaking about the Bosnian Serb Republic, what would you do if you came to power? Would you observe the Dayton agreement, or would you try to change something since you speak of this peace agreement as of the greatest "betrayal" of the Serbian national interest.

An international agreement in its legal form must be observed, but we would make an effort to change it. I am convinced that we could achieve this in a way. Say, if the Americans were interested to have us in the Partnership for peace, in NATO, we would agree. But we would say - give us Eastern Slavonija, Baranja, Vinkovci, Osijek, Zupanja, Dubrovnik and the Dubrovnik riviera, so that the Serbs who were expelled from Croatia would have somewhere to return to. We think it is important to regain at least part of the territory of the Republic of Serb Krajina.

Germans, too, waited for a long time to re-unite, but it never occurred to them to start a war...

We don't want war. We are not so stupid as to think that we could fight against NATO or the whole world...

But weren't you the one who, during the war, kept asking the regime to defy the whole world and say: "We have had enough, we don't want to negotiate with you any longer." Wasn't that the policy whose debts we are paying back now: Cost what it may? This closed up our window to the world...

No. If the regime had done so, they would have achieved a lot more. Besides, the Americans were astonished at what Milosevic agreed to in Dayton. Why are American diplomats talking about the "whisky corridor?" What Milosevic agreed to in Dayton is incredible. They approached Milosevic scientifically. They have all the characteristics of his personality in a computer and they scientifically make decisions about how to talk to him. They know that he is a man who resists, resists and eventually agrees to a lot more than he had initially been asked to. The policy of hesitating led to a bad situation in the battlefront. When you go to war, you must have a radical aim ahead of you. You must go for the maximum and accomplish what you can. And not sign 37 truces in 1991 alone. Why weren't Dubrovnik, Sibenik, Karlovac, Ogulin seized? Why not all of Western Slavonija, Osijek, Vinkovci, Zupanja? If they had be taken, we would have a completely different situation now.

There are different examples, though. Radovan Karadzic is a politician to suit your taste, he kept defying the West, he never retreated and now they are buying him a ticket to the Hague.

Karadzic made a terrible mistake at the end. If he hadn't signed the document which allowed Milosevic to represent the Bosnian Serb Republic, he would represent it himself. When he let Milosevic do it, they can bring charges against him. They can completely ignore him. That signature was fatal.

You, too, were mentioned as a candidate for the Hague. Especially after you broke off your "patriotic block" with the socialists.

That was between us and Milosevic. We were in no alliance with the socialists, but we did have concrete agreements with Milosevic.

When you broke off, many things from this dirty war were ascribed to you and your party.

Those were all fabrications. If they had any proofs against the Serbian Radical Party, they would have used them a long time ago. They had nothing. They even arrested many of our members and then let them go. I am the only Serbian politician to whom foreign journalists and even some foreign politicians ascribed war crimes. The moment they call me from the Hague, I shall go there of my own free will. No extradition is necessary. I shall pack my suitcases right away. Besides, I have had contacts with the Hague Tribunal on two occasions and told them I was ready to come if there was any reason. They told me they had nothing and that they did not rely on newspaper fabrications but on solid facts. I also told them I was ready to come as a witness in the defence of Radovan Karadzic. Because I have a range of facts which show that Karadzic and Martic never commanded the Bosnian Serb Army and the Army of the Republic of Serb Krajina in this war; the sole commander was Slobodan Milosevic. This was apparent last year when the army did not respect the decisions made by the civil government of the Bosnian Serb Republic. It was the same in the Republic of Serb Krajina. After all, I met Ratko Mladic several times during this war, each time in Milosevic's cabinet.

Speaking about Milosevic, what was the real reason to break off with him? You most often mention his betrayal, but according to some interpretations, he dismissed you upon an order from Mirjana Markovic...

That's nonsense. First of all, you do not remember our conflict with Milosevic concerning the Vance-Owen plan. That was the first time our relations were shattered. We directly opposed him and regretted hoping that he might return to the patriotic line. When he went in for the Banjaluka coup, we decided to break off with him. We had facts. Shortly after that, there was the Socialist Party of Serbia statement against us in the Federal Parliament. At the same time we said we wanted to overthrow Nikola Sainovic's government. We gave them three months. Everybody speculated, including your magazine and some other newspapers, that it was some kind of a game we were playing, that nothing would come out of it.

You are attacking Mirjana Markovic more often than you are attacking Slobodan Milosevic. Most often you do not chose the words. Why is she a more important target?

Because she is the key person of the regime, not he. The regime respects her will more than his. When his opinion is in collision with hers, hers is implemented.

You threatened to shell Rome, Vienna...

Those were the threats in case NATO planes from Italy struck Serb targets. What does it mean, they have the right to shell us and we don't have the right to shell them. Our army was capable of doing it. Our army was also capable of shelling Zagreb, but Milosevic prevented it by sending Franko Simatovic-Frenki, the red berets commander, to control the rockets on Mt. Petrova Gora. If he hadn't done so, if he hadn't guaranteed to Tudjman that the rockets wouldn't be launched at Zagreb, the Croats would never have attacked Krajina.

You have been saying for a few years now that Milosevic is falling, but the deadline seems to be moving all the time.

He would have fallen in 1994 if he hadn't been helped by the New Democracy. Repeated republican elections would have been a disaster for the socialists. The people would have gained courage and would have seen that they (socialists) can fall. If he lost the government in Serbia, he would fall. Just imagine if I showed up as the minister of the interior who controls the police guarding the Serbian Presidency. How long would he last? He would withdraw right away.

You were one of the politicians who most often qualified people as "patriots" or "traitors." Do you feel at least a little responsible for many people who feel ashamed to say that they are patriots? There were many criminals and scoundrels who "washed" their biographies in this war and put their names on the "patriots" list.

Not at all. There is real, true patriotism, as well as fake patriotism. Those who profited form their patriotism were not patriots in the real sense. No one can blame us of having made profit from any of our ideals. It cannot be said that we made our hands dirty by getting rich on account of other people's misery. Those who did get rich were close to the regime.