Neither the Beli Dvor, nor the White House

At the meeting of all opposition parties, on January 10th, only two representatives set certain conditions regarding their signatures of two adopted documents. Momcilo Perisic (the Movement for Democratic Serbia) did not sign, suggesting that the opposition, within the Parliament of FRY, should instigate the release of Slobodan Milosevic, while Vojislav Kostunica (the Democratic Party of Serbia, DSS) associated the validity of his signature with the decision of executive organs of DSS. This could have been just another game within the 'opposition circle', but, as far as DSS was concerned, not only was the signature of Kostunica practically accepted on the very next day, but also DSS appeared as a convener and host of the meeting scheduled for January 19th.

VREME: What is the key issue that has to be negotiated?

VOJISLAV KOSTUNICA: There are many things. For example, how to make communication between the opposition parties more regularly, how to arrange the exchange of information, how to bestow the business character on the overall relationship and how to unite all parties of the opposition in a comprehensive and unambiguous attitude before the approaching elections, and also in a mutual resistance against the regime's attacks and manipulations. On the occasion of the meeting, on January 10th, and even after that, the government continued with exactly the same rhetoric, though with the use of much stronger words and much heavier artillery. Such as, that the meeting and the resolutions had been ordered from abroad. There is only one customer of those demands - and that is the Serbian population, the existence of which is becoming more and more troublesome each day. Whoever casts a glance on the document addressed to all ministers of foreign affairs of Europe, the USA, Russia and China, will notice that, in its basis, it is in fact a patriotic appeal and cry for help. Besides, it is quite reasonable that the letter is not only dispatched to the Western countries, which are mainly responsible for bombing of FRY and sanctions imposed on Yugoslavia. It is also addressed to other regular members of the Security Council, such as Russia and China, one of which has played a crucial part in the concluding episode of NATO aggression. The opposition does not appeal only to one side. The regime, which attacked the signatories of this document, overlooked one fact - who is the letter addressed to.

VREME: It seems that the regime successfully manipulates with the public opinion that the agreement about co-operation between the opposition parties is, to some extent, a result of foreign pressure?

VOJISLAV KOSTUNICA: In essence, the things are quite different. Many things have changed in Serbia recently, and those changes sometimes lead to regrouping on the political scene, to different opinions and attitudes. Ever since the round table meeting on October 14th until today, no event has pointed to a conclusion about maturation or increase of alertness among the opposition. The mutual platform represents a fight for impartial election terms at all levels, I emphasise - at all levels, since the elections which would exclude the republic level, would not lead to any substantial changes in Serbia. The opposition parties gathered for the first time at that platform, and that is the demand of the electoral body. Gathering under the internal pressure is confirmed by the fact that now, within the circle of the co-operating parties, are also those, the presidents of which have recently been members of officials of SPS (the Serbian Socialist Party) or belonged to the coalition with the socialists. In my opinion, that fact is politically positive and favours the idea that the predominant influence for the integration of opposition parties, between October 14th and January 15th, was caused from within, and not from abroad (as the regime would like to present it). As for the ritual support to that integration from abroad, I think that they - who have actually been prolonging the century in favour of an authoritative regime by isolating and bombing Serbia and FRY - have lost all moral rights to discuss the opportunism of the unification of Serbian opposition.

VREME: The united opposition will have to solve the schizophrenic problem of voters who are faced with the authoritative regime, on one side, and 'bombing democracy', on the other. In similar circumstances, Milosevic has always proved to be a dexterous player.

VOJISLAV KOSTUNICA: The problem of choosing between something which is not democracy in Serbia and something which is supposed to be democracy and presents itself as such, is really enormous. On the basis of media manipulation, the electoral body will vote for one side or the other, something like the form 'one or the other'. It was similar in Montenegro, where the citizens could not find anything between Djukanovic's politics, which is far from the embodiment of reformism in economy and democracy in political terms, and pro-Milosevic's, authoritative politics, run by Bulatovic. DSS is trying to emphasise the possibility of that 'third option', especially ever since the outbreak of Albanian violence in Kosovo and Milosevic-Holbrooke agreement, the arrival of the Verification Mission, and finally, the bombardment of FRY. In short, it could be said: neither Washington, nor Dedinje. The public opinion in Serbia has to get used to, or to be educated to distinguish two things: democratic values and institutions and basic electoral principles as one thing, and today's reality as the other. Today, democracy does not appear as it had before the communism. A strict difference should be made between real democratic values and what is said to be democracy today, especially what comes from Washington's external politics.

VREME: Milosevic's propaganda is also 'fighting for fundamental values of the advanced world'...

VOJISLAV KOSTUNICA: I would not agree with that. Milosevic's regime is actually 'fighting against all injustices of the world' within the frame of the old communist rhetoric, according to the famous 'Ban all force and injustice!'

A criticism by Noam Chomsky  or Henry Kisinger, however similar it may appear, is fundamentally different from our local criticism, pronounced by the regime from an anti-democratic position. If I may be little pretentious, the position of DSS is also based on disapproval of the world's democratic reality, but from a democratic point of view. Following Wright Milson's ideas about the government elite, it can be said that between the current American State Secretary and one former, but still alive, Henry Kisinger, there is an enormous disparity in intellectual terms, in terms of political responsibility, and in terms of some kind of morality which cannot be totally neglected even within the realm of politics.

VREME: It may be unwise if I asked you what the opposition could have done, and what it had not done. It seems that, ever since 1990, the major part of opposition expected the changes to come on their own, at these or at those elections. Being confronted with such a regime, the opposition has just lost ten valuable years. In public, DSS enjoys the reputation of a party which rarely decides to join some coalitions, which is very sceptical and which, in fact, assumes a certain prerequisite for co-operation. What changed on January 10th?

VOJISLAV KOSTUNICA: The sense of this agreement lies in the fact that the elections must be elections in order to be performed in practice. I think that one segment of the opposition had been deluded about participation at the elections. Regardless of the fact that the socialists have always modified the election terms and conditions according to their own needs, so they have always won even in the worst political conditions. For example, in 1992 (at the time when Milan Panic was Prime Minister), the socialists have accepted the proportional electoral system and nine polling units, after one - and the only - round table meeting between the government and the opposition. In 1996, they have estimated that the number of polling units should be increased from 9 to 29. Some parties of the opposition have not been aware that the socialists were doing so because their own position was in danger. They were also trying to cover basically all shortages of their own politics by compensating that with the number of polling units and by imposing some new election rules. Secondly, the role of the media was changed. Whatever our opinion may be, in the beginning of the last decade, the most important media, above all the electronic media, still had a small space for expressing different attitudes. For example, 'Politika' daily - had been granted enough space for other political orientations. Today, something like that is practically inconceivable. I think that, now for the first time, there exists a clear consciousness and wakefulness among the people regarding the importance of rules, and that all matters about the elections must be elucidated before any action. The elections are either real elections or they are not elections at all.

VREME: Are you, therefore, insisting that an agreement on electoral terms and conditions should be the basic precondition? And then - with one, two or more lists?

VOJISLAV KOSTUNICA: With several lists. That is much more suitable, simply because there exist many differences in program among the opposition parties. By appearing at the elections with several lists, the parties can use their program trumps, which is impossible with only one list. Within these several groups on the Serbian political scene, there are those who put stress on collaboration with the international association. Thus, they will have a certain number of supporters? On the other hand, there are parties which are very critical towards any co-operation with the international association, particularly under the dictatorship of Washington. That is DSS. Then, there are parties or groups of parties - such as the Alliance of Democratic Parties, which focuses the major attention on rights of ethnic minorities - which favour the high level of decentralisation, even the state in which regionalism is predominant. Those parties are also going to gain votes.

VREME: In an optimistic expectation that this is the year in which this regime will be replaced with a new one - with the experience of secession of Kosovo - do you believe that the new regime would be capable of solving that problem, or that Kosovo has been detached from Yugoslavia at the very last moment before democratic changes in Serbia and FRY?

VOJISLAV KOSTUNICA: There is an attitude that the Kosovo problem will automatically be worked out as soon as the regime changes; that attitude is uncritical, just as is the regime's position that Kosovo is preserved or that it will be preserved after June, when the first mandate of KFOR and UNMIK expires. That is beyond reality, it is about an intentionally wrong interpretation of the Resolution 1244. Kosovo does not belong to us now, nor will it be so after that June. It is ours in a very loose sense of the word, thanks to the contradiction of the world interests, thanks to the Resolution 1244 which predicts that the sovereignty and territorial integrity of FRY must be preserved, thanks to the fact that our population still lives in Kosovo, thanks to their resoluteness to linger there, on their home ground... The Kosovo Serbs are just a remainder of a cruel selection, so those who have still remained in the province, will hardly leave it. Those people have been living in the present conditions for several hundreds of years, and it will be very difficult to banish them from there. However, it is a different thing to keep talking that nothing has changed, that our sovereignty in Kosovo is being proven, as the regime maintains. That is totally incorrect. On the other side, it is also incorrect to claim that Kosovo will become fully reintegrated with Serbia as soon as the regime in Serbia is changed. It will not be so, and those who claim that are misleading the public.

VREME: May the Kosovo problem be solved, at least, more easily under a new regime?

VOJISLAV KOSTUNICA: We will have stronger trumps, but the problem is that opponents of the current authoritative regime and Milosevic's government are not pretty much united. There exists a certain mélange, and people are apt to waste good trumps for nothing. Nevertheless, I think that the state of affairs will change and that the general position and relationships in the world will improve, so that the results of a reasonable policy will be able to gradually preserve Kosovo and reintegrate it within a legal and political system of Serbia.