Faith in the Silent Majority

From March 15 to 17 the Aspen Institute held a conference in Berlin at which the Yugoslav case was examined as a blueprint for overcoming the troubles in Eastern Europe. It was chaired by Mr. David Anderson, a former American ambassador to Belgrade.

The participants included the present American ambassador to Yugoslavia, his German counterpart and some thirty diplomats, scientists and journalists from Great Britain, France, America and other countries. Slovenia, Croatia and Macedonia were each represented by high ranking officials. The representative of the Serbian ruling party was unable to attend due to ill health, but provided no replacement.

The American side pointed out that the recognition of the Serbo-Montenegrin state should not be understood as "either an acknowledgement to Serbia, or as giving in to blackmail", but as recognition of the actual state of affairs which is that "Serbia is the biggest power in the Balkans, larger than either Greece or Hungary". There is also "a huge army, either under direct Serbian control, or very close to the Serbian position". It was stressed that recognition would constitute a good political and diplomatic move, while a refusal to grant recognition would be the surest way to instigate a war in Bosnia and Herzegovina. Should it not attain international recognition, Serbia would be left "without a reward, and Slobodan Milosevic would suffer "a major blow". He would find himself under "great pressure", which would "not be of any importance if Serbia were a minor power".

Serbia also needs to recognize the territorial integrity of other Yugoslav states, and they should do the same. Finally, it should make "a much more significant effort" to settle the Albanian problem in Kosovo.

Unlike the Slovenian and Croatian representatives, who began and ended almost every one of their contributions by reviling the already dead Yugoslavia and swearing that there was no possibility of reviving it, those from the West were mainly interested in pointing out that "governments come and go, whereas geography stays the same".

The German side pointed out that Bonn "considers the Yugoslav space to be a unified whole" and that this is the reason Germany "supports an association of all the Yugoslav republics with the European Community". After frequent assurances on the part of Slovenia and Croatia that even economic feasibility could not get "political approval", the warning came that "political emotions cannot be used as an excuse for unwillingness cooperate on a mutually beneficial basis".

However, the officials of the new northern and southern republics in the Balkans rejected even the possibility of a customs union, because, as they say, they fear any form of federal administration because" it has always been a well hidden component of Serbian domination". They bitterly denounced the evaluation that "micro-states" are not likely to survive, pointing to the examples of Denmark and other countries.

As proof of the resilience of their own economy, the Croats stated that three Serbian dinars can be obtained for a single Croatian dinar, that the standard of living in Serbia is lower than that in Croatia and that one can better withstand deprivation under decentralized conditions.

The participants close to Wall Street, however, were not touched by these assurances. They clearly stated that they do not believe in the economic future of "micro states" in which political economy of lesser stability is enforced. Very small states do not get foreign capital and technology and they cannot, as economic history shows, provide economic growth, which makes the payment of foreign debt even more uncertain, read the verdict.

"The world sees Yugoslavia as a group case, not as individual problems of each republic and this is the reason the question of the payment of debts will be settled in groups", said the bankers. They did not fail to mention that without the group settlement of public and commercial foreign debts, no Yugoslav republic can expect to have access to the international capital market.

It was also said that it would be necessary to establish a common market again and that swift privatization is desirable so that "the people can decide on their political preference on the basis of their own interest".

The prevailing opinion of the Western participants of the Berlin meeting was that hyper-inflation and hyper-nationalism characterize the entire Yugoslav space at present.

For certain Western analysts "the change of leadership in the Yugoslav republics is necessary for the successful solution of the crisis because the present leaders are not willing to compromise". There were also suggestions that the West should give greater support to non-national political parties, so that the "institutions and leaders with trans-national tendencies" could develop.