The Leader Is Not Infallible

The book The Last Days of the Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (SFRY), which, following an unofficial ban, has disappeared from the shelves of the book shops in Serbia and which has become a bestseller this summer in Slovenia (for less than a month 4000 copies was sold), is finally making it's way back to Belgrade, this time as an independent edition and the first private enterprise of the former president of SFRY.

VREME; Did you think that your book, while you were writing it, would prove to be so dangerous?

JOVIC: The book isn't the least bit dangerous. I believe that it is very useful for a rational policy; because those politicians who have a responsibility towards their nations are obliged to explain to them why their country had collapsed and what had happened.

Why did you wait so long with the second edition of the book The Last days of SFRY?

Because none of the publishing houses dared to re-publish it. Even though I had tried to work out an agreement with them, with some I was really very close, all withdrew from the project at the end, afraid of the consequences, since they were aware that the book wasn't to the government's liking.

If the book wasn't to the liking of the Milosevic family following the Dayton agreement, do you believe that better times await it now?

Even though there were no reasons for it, the Serbian authorities were not capable of comprehending that the truth, as presented in the book in a non-biased, objective way - was in the interest of the Serbian nation. The Serbian authorities couldn't stand the fact that the book was demolishing the myth of the leader's infallability. Which is why they acted drastically towards myself and towards the book. I was ousted from office, by-passing all democratic norms and procedures, while the book, even though formally it wasn't banned, was in all possible manners prevented from reaching the public. Which is why there was such a long waiting period for the second edition, despite the public's immense interest.

It could be said that the anathema which the couple Markovic-Milosevic had thrown at your book has not been forgotten a year later - one publisher, with whom you had nearly drawn up an agreement, canceled following a telephone call "from the right place". At the end you decided to publish it yourself?

Everyone withdrew, even though it was clear that publishing that book was a good business move for any publisher. At the end I myself had engaged a printing house, however even that printing house had withdrawn due to the same reasons. Top officials openly told me that they had been warned not to do that. It was a clear case of outside influence.

Are you hurt by the fact that the government, or in other words, your party comrades, aren't leaving you alone even a year after the book has made it's appearance?

I believe those are party mistakes. Not a single person exists who does not make mistakes. I believe that at the end it shall be understood that the book is an objective historical document, a document which helps to clarify historical truths of that period and which as such cannot harm anyone. I believe that our country and our people have no reason to be afraid of the truth.

Do you feel any satisfaction by the fact that you had warned President Milosevic in due time of what would happen on account of a marriage of SPS and JUL, against whose electoral rigging today voters are demonstrating in all the larger cities of Serbia?

I didn't write about that in the actual book... As far as satisfaction goes - I believe no one can be satisfied with the current situation. I wouldn't prejudice anything, however that is a consequence of the wrong moves which have brought about bad results.

Therefore, you still believe that the SPS-JUL connection proved to be harmful to SPS?

I believe that in that coalition JUL has profited, since they have received more mandates for the federal MP's than JUL, in accordance with the number of won votes, would have been entitled to. That can be concluded indirectly, on the basis of the results which JUL had attained at the local level, when it stood alone.

How do you explain that in your electoral unit, in Batocina, JUL won, while, for example, in "red Kragujevac' the opposition won?

That is a story unto itself. If in the smaller towns and villages criterions would be used which were implemented in the larger cities during the annulment of the election results, then, in my opinion, more than half the mandates would have to be annulled there as well. Therefore, in Batocina as well. However, there is no sense in discussing that now, since no one has complained there. As far as the opposition victory in Kragujevac is concerned, your question should be answered by local top officials, who have lost the elections. I have my own opinion on that. I believe that policies which were employed during the pre-election period in Kragujevac in a large measure contributed so that things could turn out as they did.

Don't such results, combined with the fact that due to the inter-coalition clinch even one minister (of foreign affairs Milutinovic) has to return his MP mandate in benefit of the Pink TV director (JUL member), cause revolt in the SPS circles?

Possibly. However I believe that Milutinovic returned his mandate by agreement, and not due to revolt.

All the same - do you think that's fair?

It isn't fair that a certain party surrenders it's seats to another party, as is now happening with SPS and JUL. However, word isn't of fair or not fair relations, but rather of an agreement between those parties. That isn't good will nor force, but an agreement. If Milutinovic had returned his mandate out of revolt, I believe that he would have been ousted from office by now.

How does the fact that the leaders of SPS and JUL are at the same time marriage and coalition partners influence the reputation of SPS amongst it's members and voters?

It isn't in the slightest bit pleasant to comment on such a thing; I shall start off with our peoples mentality which doesn't like such things, they find it difficult to accept that two members from the same family are heading two parties, even if they are joined at the elections...

Do you wish to say that our patriarchal nation can't stand a wife which dictates to her husband, even if he is the president?

I wouldn't like to dwell on aspects of control over the husband, but would rather generally focus on logical consequences in politics. And we didn't have logical consequences here, not in politics, nor in our party policies.

How come, when you refer to SPS, you still say "we", as though you were still part of SPS?

I am a member of the Socialist Party and in accordance with the Statute I have a right to my own opinion regarding party decisions. In our Statute it is clearly stated that every member has the right to represent his stand even when a different decision has been adopted, although unfortunately it isn't practiced.

You have been ousted from office formally due to your book, by-passing democratic norms and procedures. We can deduce that the current government, in the same style, is responsible for outmaneuvering the democratic procedures at the local elections?

I didn't directly take part in that which is why I find it difficult to pass judgment; the fact is that our party has politically lost it's reputation due to all that had occurred in connection with these elections (although the opposition didn't fare much better either); and as far as style is concerned, which you ask me of, I would say that, if democratic norms aren't respected in the ruling party which are valid for that very party and it's members, a danger exists that such a practice could be transferred and could spread.

Are the protests of the demonstrators then justified? Does the election will of the citizens have to be respected and how can this current conflict be resolved?

The conflict cannot be resolved on the streets, that's clear; it should be resolved in the institutions of the system. Which means that all those who were elected into the republic assembly, which had called the elections, should sit down and discuss all their problems there which had appeared in connection to the elections. Shortly, I cannot justify neither the government nor the opposition; I cannot excuse the government for possibly using too much, or should I say - misusing the legal possibilities for annulling the elections where they had lost them, by which they had partially incited this situation, yet at the same time the opposition has made a tragic mistake in not having take another road, to confirm the election results and to prove to the government that all was in order; instead of that, the opposition has vacillated. First saying "we're not taking part", then "we refuse to recognize", after which they send their representatives to the election committees to sign the minutes...

Is there any danger that things could finish as they did on March of 1991?

No such danger exists.

Which means that Milosevic shall not use the army and bring tanks out to the streets?

The army has nothing to do with this. Simply, no mood exists amongst the people to destructively turn against the government. I strongly believe that here, as far as the government is concerned, absolutely no one shall use any type of force against the demonstrators, if the demonstrations are peaceful.

How do you look upon the reports of state media (RTS, Radio, regime press) and the citizens fierce revolt against them?

Media is in a large degree responsible for the overall situation. Especially Television, then the Radio... The press as well, which is controlled by the government, because it does not give out enough information and does not give out true information. Some even claim that a certain number of people go out to the streets in the evening because they wish to see what is really happening and what it looks like, since they can't find such things out on state television... Television is very closed, and has been so for a long period of time, definitely longer than a year and a half, two years, since serious criticism has appeared on account of Television, that it does not present the true state of affairs.

Have you taken a walk in the last couple of days?

I have. But not with the demonstrators.