Disputes in the Left Wing

Starting out from Ravna Gora (from where he used to hit the road before elections), the re-verified leader of SPO (the Serbian Renewal Movement) Vuk Draskovic began to issue public warnings on a daily basis that the standard of living in Serbia got much worsened since October 5th last year. One can purchase much less with as an approximate salary of 150 DEM today, than he used to with 75 DEM from the time of Milosevic’s reign (SPO too had its period of office in the government). The media are, says Vuk, perhaps even worse than they used to be, the same secret police that used to maltreat and execute the opponents of the regime still exists and is run by the same people, Serbia is still not governed by the Parliament, but by some kind of a politburo – ‘a hydra with eighteen heads that decides upon everything’. In addition, Draskovic also claims that nothing is being constructed within the country. Such Vuk’s critique might easily seem as the story of ‘sour grapes’, i.e. the story by a politician who got kicked out of political life thanks to his own erroneous estimations, and who is desperately trying to re-establish himself within it. Similar remarks could not be simply applied to other warnings against poor results of the new authorities. For example, an analysis offered by the sociologist Laslo Sekelj, according to whom the DOS (the Democratic Opposition of Serbia) Government is atrocious, because it is the government without a real opposition; the mass media are flattering and obsequious, but even more disgusting than during Milosevic’s regime; the standard of living in Serbia declined comparing to before October 5th; in some segments of society (health, education, etc.) the situation is disastrous; organised crime combined with politics is still the vital economic subject; instead of a radical change of the entire system, there was only a radical change of human resources in authoritative organs. Only the criminals remained the same. Dr. Sekelj too mentions the government of politburo, but at the end of his meticulous analysis he still does admit that the general atmosphere in the country is now warmer and much more bearable, although the degree of disappointment in DOS’s pre-electoral promises is quite high.

WHERE IS BREAD: What is certain at this moment is that in Serbia – in which about 75% of the population lives on the verge of a mere survival, spending less than two dollars a day – the period of post-revolutionary enthusiasm is replaced by the period of post-revolutionary blues, in which the majority of people ask – where is the bread?

Currently, all DOS leaders and representatives, no matter whether they are right- or left-orientated speak about a ‘socially responsible state’ and promise that they will not encourage a badly planned privatisation (which would leave about 400,000 people without jobs), and that in the course of implementing reforms care will be taken of the most socially endangered categories of citizens. In view of the approaching task as well as the consequences of the announced reforms, many experts are of the opinion that, in future, decisive political battles for getting hold of power in Serbia will necessarily take place in the left wing, however, not the extreme left wing, but more closely associated with the centre – the option that is usually marked as social-democratic in modern Europe. Many heads of the DOS hydra could apparently be pointed in that direction. There are only differences regarding when something of the kind may happen – some analysts think that the condensation of political space around the left centre is about to begin very soon; other, however, claim that something like that is yet to come only in a few years.

VREME’S interviewee, Dijana Vukomanovic from Belgrade Institute of Political Studies, estimates that in future political parties in Serbia will attempt to impose themselves as predictors and analysts of their voters’ social interests, not national interests, as it has been the case so far. And that means that the voters in Serbia might eventually realise that it is more useful to put their hands in their pockets and make sure that they are empty before going to the elections and giving their votes. In the period of reforms that is before us, the questions of social equality and justice are becoming crucial, since the future of many social layers is getting quite unpredictable. The experience of other countries in transition, illustrate that in such cases, entirely new social layers that are vulnerable to changes, tend to appear and are considered to be ‘definite losers’ – the unqualified and half-qualified workers, pensioners, members of the former repressive apparatus… Due to their status as losers, they, our interlocutor claims, are likely to cause a number of problems by organising protests and influencing sudden variations of the general electoral will.

The new power-holders, as well as those who intend to represent the interests of the workers, are about to face two utterly opposite problems. On the one hand, they will do everything to persuade the workers not to go out in the streets to protest. On the other, they will have to make about the same effort to reinstate those workers in factories and convince them to labour. In the past years, hundreds of thousands of people made their living thanks to ‘shadow economy’. Those who are now accustomed to develop their own strategies of survival will find it extremely hard to get used to working from 8 am to 3 pm, for a much lesser salary at the beginning. Those who intend to invest some capital here will insist on a different ethics of work and a different relation to the manpower, and it seems unlikely that anyone will be in position to bring about some order in that sphere. Serbian Minister for Work and Employment, Dragan Milovanovic complained these days that ‘there is a lack of interest for employment’ in Serbia. Milovanovic claims that a number of working places accessible this year are still vacant because many people simply do not wish to have them occupied.

RIGHT PROTECTORS: Since the mid twenties onwards, all surveys of publicity have shown that the majority of those threatened by the social crisis (workers above all) were giving their votes to SPS (the Serbian Socialist Party) or to Seselj’s Radicals. It can even be said that a substantial number of workers saw the right wing and the Radical Party as the best ‘protectors’ of their social and economic interests. ‘Therefore, one should not exclude the scenario in which the political space around the left centre would be filled even with the empty quasi-populist rhetoric of the Radicals, who disprove the current economic reforms only with political arguments, instead of well-structured social programs’, says Dijana Vukomanovic. ‘It seems that the left political field will become the most attractive terrain for political struggles which will be a magnet for many new parties with their interpretations of social matters.’

Those parties which happen to be involved in that political scene, will have to count on syndicates and employers, and later also on foreign investors. IMF and other financial organisations will also determine those rules to some extent, but will impose some strict demands as well. Politicians who wish to exercise power in such circumstances will be compelled to learn how to find a way out social conflicts.

GOOD FOR DOS, BAD FOR COVIC: Many members of DOS share the ambition to present themselves as interpreters of the social-democratic option. Some parties, the names of which already have a social-democratic connotation. Unlike all post-communist countries, Serbia has now remained the only country in which there is no strong social-democratic party. Instead of it, there are many small-sized parties of related names. Although one should not neglect the (in) capability of some political actors to create a powerful party of social-democratic determination, the credit for this specific trait of Serbian politics goes to the former ruling party. SPS has offered a false presentation of itself for years – as a modern left-wing party – and reached perfection in a fraud of political programs of other parties, as was methodically conveyed in the political magazine the ‘New Serbian Political Thought’ (1/1998) by Slobodan Samardzic from the Institute of European Studies. Samardzic claims that the spectre of program orientations and practical results of the socialists were marvelous.

In the same edition of this periodical, Mira Bogdanovic wrote about the left wing with a glimpse onto some future epoch that was about to transpire here. She said that the ‘ideal solution would be a democratic party with good relation with syndicates… which would be obliged towards the market reforms, and at the same time, keep the faith in a better future alive, which means that no sacrifice is futile…’

The current Serbian Prime Minister, Zoran Djindjic revealed his intention to move his Democratic Party somewhat leftwards. Such suggestions have recently arrived from international social-democratic seats, and there is no doubt that the DS leadership will be directed towards that wing in the future.

Dijana Vukomanovic stresses that DS, via Djidjic’s position, is very likely to present itself as a protector of reforms and all those who depend on economic policy.

 ‘A politician that stands a good chance to prove himself to be a real man of reforms is definitely Nebojsa Covic. He has a management experience of a successful factory, considerable political experience as a former Mayor of Belgrade, so he is prone to draw both the former SPS and the current DOS voters. But, Covic’s present image is being built around not social, but ethnical issues. However, it can be disadvantageous for his own party, since due to his occupation in the south of Serbia, he does not find time to strengthen the image of a modern social-democratic politician of a European type’, says Vukomanovic.

PARTY OF PRISONERS: Another VREME interviewee, Dr. Vladimir Cvetkovic from the Institute of Philosophy and Social Theory, believes that one day, the major political struggle might revolve around the left centre, but he notices that the hasty use of the terms ‘left’ and ‘right’ has become anachronous. According to Cvetkovic, what is about to occur is a political battle for the ‘subject of privatisation’. ‘There will be severe disputes with DOS, apart from that, SPO will most probably become history. SPS, unless it gets rid of Milosevic’s legacy, will soon become the most ordinary party of prisoners. The egalitarian rhetoric of the Radicals has sense only in the conditions of a commanding economy. All in all, nobody can tell which of the current political leaders will still occupy their present posts. In any case, we are about to witness terrible compromises, since our story is far from European’, claims Cvetkovic.

It is not yet clear whether the former ruling party will or will not find itself in the transitional period. A few officials of this party, those that are not busy with interrogations and police investigations, sometimes think aloud that SPS has some future after all. They claim that they constitute a significant part of the electorate, that they will never approve of DOS’s reforms, and they are recalling similar international experiences (Poland, Hungary). The trouble of SPS is, however, that they are far from being social-democratically orientated, and that our story much surpasses those from other close or distant environments.

Dijana Vukomanovic defines SPS today as a service for maintaining the image of Slobodan Milosevic, a man who has caused the fall of this party just like his own. ‘SPS has not yet succeeded in consolidating itself after the defeat, and is severely hit by various faction disputes. The only right option of survival of this party is a faction split before the eyes of the public. That could happen at a next party congress, which is not yet in sight. SPS must go through a public ritual of cleansing if it intends to participate in the transitional period. It is obvious that one faction within the party is still attempting to reshape the cult of Slobodan Milosevic. Khrushchev would have done something similar long ago by rejecting the cult of Stalin.’

At the moment when Khrushchev spoke, a part of Stalin’s politburo was already imprisoned.

CATEGORISATION

President of the Lower Chamber of the FRY Parliament and President of the Democratic Centre (DC), Dr. Dragoljub Micunovic, explained last week in an interview to Politika daily that the seven-member Yugoslav delegation has recently been granted the status of a special guest in the Parliament of the Council of Europe. In this parliament there are five groups of MPs: the firm left wing, the social-democratic group, the group of national parties, the liberal and the conservative groups. Members of the Yugoslav delegation, which is soon to be granted full membership, were asked to opt for one of those groups. Kostunica’s DSS opted for the group of national parties, while DS, SPS, SNP and DC chose to participate in the social-democratic-socialist group.

‘Every member of the Council of Europe’s Parliament represents the program of his party, not only the interests of his country. That is a preparation for a political unity of Europe, and something new for our political culture’, explained Dr. Micunovic. It will not be possible to have a say in that parliament by talking something that does not correspond to what is valid at home, so it will be necessary that our parties profile themselves in terms of their programs about economic and political questions.