Will There Be A Referendum?

Franjo Tudjman openly clashed with citizens of Istria before he became Croatia's President. In the spring of 1990, after being booed at the Croatian Democratic Union (HDZ) election campaign rally in Labin and in other Istrian districts, Tudjman brusquely told the local electorate that ``if you don't like Croatia, you are free to leave it.'' This quite tactless and arrogant message and threat cost Tudjman's party a lot--HDZ lost the elections in Istria. At the same time, this episode, which occurred at the beginning of pluralism in Croatia, symbolically represents the region's position in Croatia's political spectre--Istria and HDZ have since been opposite poles.

By electing the Istrian Democratic Assembly (IDS) to advocate its authentic interests (over 70% of Istrian voters in all cast their ballots for IDS, the percentage of their sympathisers in some districts exceeding 90%), Istrians have in many ways represented the only opposition to the ruling regime in the past three years (anti-war movement, resistance to increasing racism and centralisation, fair treatment of local, ``loyal'' Serbs, etc). This is why Istria has been the most vehemently criticised Croatian region, as the hotbed of ``Commies,'' Yugo-nostalgists, autonomists, defective and insuffuciently ``nationally aware'' Croats. It has been treated as a ``prodigal son'' or a ``traitor,'' depending on the moment. Istrians, however, seem to have had enough of such treatment and have opted for a more aggressive style. IDS has recently launched several ``verbal bombs,'' thoroughly unnerving the Croatian public and the Croatian authorities in particular.

Dissatisfied with President Tudjman's unprincipled stand on Istria, particularly with laws on local administration and self-administration, which placed jurisdiction over Istria outside the region, more precisely in Zagreb, IDS MPs underscored at their party session in Labin on August 2 that they would fight for constitutional reforms and firmly oppose the ``centralism leading to totalitarianism.''

On the other hand, Istrians have for months now been complaining about the forced ``Croatianizing of Istria'' and the imposition of a crass and extremist Herzegovinaesque (as they call it) Croatianness. They feel the current authorities want to deprive Istria of many of its attributes--Mediterranean, Balkan, European, South Slav, open--and, in exchange, give it what it already has--the attribute `region' and a Croatian one at that.

Although Zagreb is trying to present its conflict with Istria as ideological, it is obvious to any politically literate observer that the two have different concepts of state system. While HDZ urges a centralist state (marked by a much greater degree of centralisation than the state which had to be disintegrated because of its ``centralism''), the IDS urges that Istria become a modern region with a local and regional self-administration modelled after similar existing ones in Europe, respecting minority rights, and a civic state concept.

IDS stresses that 80-90% of the income of highly-developed European regions is returned to them, while barely 8-9 percent of Istria's earnings remains in the region, which is not only unfair but also unstimulative. ``I do not have the precise figure, but I know our financial experts tell us we could be happy if Zagreb were leaving us as much as Belgrade once had,'' Ivan Panleta, an IDS MP said in an interview to the Rijeka Novi list (July 15, 1993).

Aiming to turn Istria into a trans-border region modelled after 18 such regions in Europe and urging peaceful relations with neighboring states (including Slovenia and Croatia), IDS says its policy is an act of good will. Since Istrians found themselves separated into two states after the disintegration of Yugoslavia, they now say they want to create conditions for the withering away of borders. They are simultaneously forced to constantly underline that they, too, had voted for Croatia's sovereignty and that Istria as a trans-border region does not threaten Croatia's integrity as a state. The HDZ, however, does not have an ear for such ``suspicious'' proposals.

One is hence able to draw the conclusion that Istria will inevitably clash with HDZ over its project of Croatia, for, as Istrian Parish priest Luciano del Bianco says, ``IDS will neither make compromises nor abandon its demands.'' An IDS delegate said the following at the Labin session: ``... one must tell the central power-wielders `enough' and stop the humiliation of Istria's population.'' ``This is why we are seeking--Istria's autonomy!,'' an IDS leader, Elio Martincic, said. Will there be a referendum?