As soon as the arrests had taken place, an ad hoc human rights defense committee - the Committee for Justice - was set up, and it has mobilized thousands of Slovenians in defense of the four.
The first of these tendencies, towards democratization, is being expressed primarily in Slovenia, in the north of Yugoslavia, but it is not limited to this region. The other is, for the moment, dominant in Serbia, in the south. So we can talk about a north-south division of the country in which the south — ideologically and politically speaking more conservative and more orthodox in the sense of the Bolshevik tradition -dominates the north, which is more developed.
When we speak of the democratization of our country, the first point to remember is that we are talking about a movement from below. It is the independent selforganization of our society, the result of independent initiatives and of independent social movements that have begun to put pressure on the political system to force it to modernize, to become more tolerant and more democratic.
The forces for democratization include both independent initiatives and certain Slovenian political structures. Among the latter, the important place held by the Slovenian Socialist Youth Alliance (SSYA) must be noted. Sometimes, we describe it as civil society's representative in the political system. It plays a mediating role between the social movements and the political system, where political decisions are made.
But the Slovenian Communist Party has also begun to modernize itself. It has become more liberal, it is trying to rationalize its activities, it sees itself as an advocate of social change, of a more liberal economy, more independent political and economic decision-making processes, and it is ready to conduct a dialogue with society. This was not the case ten years ago.
On the other side, there is this conservative force that has lost all political and ideological credibility. They are incapable of mobilizing any sort of social support. Their only activity is to assure themselves of the support of the repressive state apparatus. They hide behind the army and the police. However, it isn't the police that maintain law and order, so much as the army.
This has been the case since 1984, but it has been even more clear since 1986, the year of the SSYA's Congress, where what could be called an "alternative" political program was adopted. The army plays a decisive role: it is the most inclined to strug-
----- pull-quotes on this page -----
but also its historical legitimacy"
----- photo credits and running heads -----
9
International Viewpoint #150 • October 31, 1988
YUGOSLAVIA
Austria
Hungary
Ljubljana
•
SLOVENIA
Vojvodina
Zagreb
CROATIA
*Rijeka
BOSNIA AND
HERCEGOVNIA
Sarajevo
MONTENEGRO
Adriatic Sea
Titograd can's secret speech They were seen by the Slovenian population, as well by other democratic forces, as the first BELGRADE step towards the restoration of "order" by force, and as a why so many people Kosovo this attempt to solve political and social problems by repres-
MACEDONIA
July 4. This date is generally celebrated by the authorities, but this year besides the official ceremony there was another, an alternative. And while the official parade drew a few hundred individuals, more than 10,000 people attended the one called by the Com-
And, especially important, the Committee had organized its alternative in collaboration with veterans of the national liberation struggle. This is the first time that the tradition of national resistance has made common cause with the democratic movement. Ordinarily, it has been used against the partisans of democratic reforms, who have been presented as enemies of tradition. It is important to point this out, because it shows that the regime has lost not only its credibility, but also its historical • What was the position of the Slovenian authorities on the trial?
MH: After the legal violations and the arrogance shown by the military tribunal dur-
Italy
Albania gle against this democratic movement developing in Slovenia and other parts of the country. We can speak of a direct conflict between democratic forces and the army, which has become the guardian of the status quo. The trial is nothing more than one more event in the ongoing counter-offensive of the army and conservative
Let's go over the facts. There was a meeting of the Military Council in Belgrade. This body has a consultative power, it can advise the president of how to act in case of a war or grave danger, but it is not a political organ. In the course of this meeting last March, the Military Council adopted a declaration stating that a counter-revolution was taking place in Slovenia. This was obviously meant as a political declaration, and, as a result, the army began to discuss some practical means of repressing this so-called counter-revolution.
The Central Committee of the League of Yugoslavian Communists (LCY) met secretly in Belgrade two weeks after the meeting of the Military Council, and the secretary general of the Slovenian CP tried to refute these accusations. He polemicized against the Military Council, revealing in the course of his speech some of the procedures that had been used: a special delegation from the army's high command had been sent to the Ministry of Internal Affairs in Ljubljana to ask whether the police could control the situation if the army were to arrest some people on account of their democratic activities.
These and other details came out in Milan's speech.. the minutes were made public, I don't know how. But the fact is that since the beginning of May, there have not only been rumors circulating in Slovenia 10 vene, but also pas toties of Milanter- that the army was getting ready to inter-
Three days after the arrests, a Committee for Justice was set up to coordinate the various political and social groups fighting repression. The Committee has a huge number of affiliates and individual members — at the moment there are over 1,000 affiliated organizations and more than 70,000 individuals making about 100,000 people, mostly but not entirely from Slovenia.
When we talk about affiliated groups, you have to understand that it is very heterogeneous. On the one hand we have groups coming out of the social movements, and, on the other hand, we also have rank-and-file trade-union or Communist Party groups. The Committee includes students, workers, intellectuals, professional organizations, religious people, cultural groups, newspapers, and so on. It is the first time since the war that the Church has taken a clear political position. What we are dealing with here is an organization that represents the whole of society. All classes, all layers of Slovenian society are taking part in this. It is a democratic movement embracing the entire nation.
The Committee has mostly concentrated on analyzing the numerous violations of the constitution and of due process that took place throughout the inquiry and the trial, and it tried to aid the four defendants. now convicted. Among the activities of the group, there are regular meetings of the leadership or coordinating body - they meet at least once a day, sometimes twice. There are also the plenary sessions, with hundreds of people taking part, which are held at least once a week. And the demonstrations. For example, on June 26 in Ljubljana the biggest demonstration since the Second World War was held, attracting over 40,000 people.
The second important demonstration organized by the Committee happened on the anniversary of Yugoslavian independence, ing the trial, it was clear to everyone that the latter wasn't based on any true judicial arguments, that it was nothing but a political trial. That's why the Committee kept on about the question of legality and of due process, why we demanded a public trial, the chance for the defendants to be tried in their own language, and so on.
Then, when we found out about all the documents mentioned earlier, we began to spotlight their contents, exposing not military secrets, as they might have wanted to make people believe, but the political significance they held. The Committee tried to force the president of the Slovenian republic to make a public pronouncement on the document, which he did not do.
We put the question to him: is this document constitutional or not? His first response was that he couldn't say anything about it, he wasn't competent to do so, saying that only the president of Yugoslavia had the authority to make declarations about military documents, as he is also the commander-in-chief of the armed forces.
So we reformulated our question by basing ourselves on an article in the constitution saying that each citizen of the republic is the guardian of the constitution, which is also valid for the president. On that basis we asked him to give us his opinion on the
The next day, he sent us his response to our second demand, which was to say that he would never answer our question seriously — it was not timely because it would put the Slovenian people in serious danger and himself in conflict with the federal
Reading between the lines, his answer can be interpreted as follows: friends, it is anti-constitutional, but this isn't the right time to say so as it could provoke a conflict with the military, possibly escalating to an armed intervention." For us, this is evidence that the document is completely unconstitutional since it cedes to the army powers it should have only in
October 31, 1988 • #150 International Viewpoint case of war or in "abnormal conditions," which can only be established by the president of Yugoslavia, by civil authority. The army can't do this itself. • According to you, then, the political crisis in Yugoslavia is such that it could imply a showdown with the army?
BR: The army's role in socialist countries is closely linked to the very nature of "existing socialist" regimes. I believe that this specific role developed out of the system of war communism established by Stalin, where there was no separation whatsoever between the political and military spheres. Military intervention could always discipline the population. That is equally true for Yugoslavia.
We're dealing with a highly militarized political regime. Almost all leaders are also in the army or the police. Tacitly, the army has the ability to intervene in social life. Some articles of the constitution, like some points of law, leave open the possibility for military intervention. A regional state of siege can be declared, anyone can be arrested on suspicion of offences against the state. And the limits of these laws are illdefined, they can be implemented unconditionally, depending on the circumstances. • Is the army ready to take power?
TM: Society and the political system are already so militarized in our country that the army doesn't need to intervene directly. It is already present at every level of political and social life. As it is now, if martial law were declared, the army would take responsibility for the situation. Today it has the power, but not the responsibility it would have in the context of a military coup d'etat.
What we can point to is the army's attempt to intervene more directly in the case of Slovenia, which has never happened before in Yugoslavia. It would be a new and more advanced stage of militarization of society, and politicization of the military. And any step in that direction would have as its consequence the further destabilization of the country, the destruction of the economy, the further disappearance of political life and an aggravation of the situation. • So, will things stay as they are?
BR: The idea that the status quo is being maintained is a bit of an illusion, because this status quo is a balancing act that has gone on for decades, but now there aren't the resources to sustain it any longer. Attempts to keep it going are out of the question now.
I believe there are two quite similar currents: one in Serbia with Milosevic and Serbian populism, which one could call "open" Serbianism; and the other "Yugoslavist" current, which is in fact nothing more than disguised Serbianism, since it is mostly led by Serbs. The federation and its institutions have a very marked Serbian character.
MH: All military officers are also Party leaders. All civil authority is also military authority, so they don't need to take power, they have it already. This combination was perfectly symbolized by Marshal Tito, and following his death a movement for defining the respective roles of the military and the Communist Party and reinforcing civilian control came on the scene. Thus, it was proposed that the minister of defence be a civilian, and not a military man, which is the case for us
BR: We believe that the separation of the political and military spheres would contribute to resolving the economic crisis in Yugoslavia.
YUGOSLAVIA
For instance, a car factory in Maribor manufactures a certain amount of its production for the army, but the army declared that it could not pay. The Slovenian govemment could find no better solution than to propose a new tax to refinance the army so it could pay what it owed! The deputies voted down the proposal, then the govemment put pressure on mayors so that fifteen days later it succeeded in putting a new demand to assess a higher level of "solidarity" for the least developed regions of the country: Kosovo, Montenegro, Macedonia and so on.
MH: It is these new social movements,
11
International Viewpoint #150 • October 31, 1988
YUGOSLAVIA the Slovenian Youth Alliance and the weekly Mladina, which have been working the hardest for this demilitarization of our society and of our country. • Antagonistic nationalisms in every republic of the Yugoslav federal state are on the rise...Are the independent movements capable of overcoming divisions that in the final analysis could serve the ends of the central authorities?
TM: What we're dealing with in Yugoslavia is two types of economic and political development, one Slovenian and the other Serbian. Many people don't understand what is happening in Serbia. We've attended several mass demonstrations there in the last few months, but also protests of the Serbian minority in Kosovo.
These Serb nationalist movements were instigated and encouraged by an authoritarian Serb leadership formed after Milosevic took power last autumn. Since that time, he has continually tried to provoke a climate of emotional patriotism and political irrationality. One of the first acts of his government was to conduct a purge of Serbian newspaper editors in order to have the media under his thumb. And the media began to lead a campaign against the Albanian population in Kosovo, and against Slovenians, calling Slovenian democratic forces counter-revolutionary.
This mass movement has some elements in common with a fascist movement. It is a right-wing populist movement, a combination of Stalinist or neo-Stalinist features with fascist characteristics. In their demonstrations, the people call for arms, for violence, they demand a military intervention, for the army to come in.
On the other hand, we have the mass or nationalist — movement in Slovenia, but the differences between the two are very significant. In Slovenia, the national question is only a part of a broader democratic movement, it is only one of the demands of this democratic upheaval. So, in talking about a nationalist renewal in Yugoslavia, it is important to draw the distinctions between these two types of nationalism.
Concerning contacts between the Slovenian democratic movement and other democratic movements in the rest of Yugoslavia, well, we have always tried to have relations with them. We are in contact with small groups identical to those in Slovenia, especially in Zagreb where there are groups of feminists, pacifists and ecologists, and others in Belgrade.
But in the last two years, given the campaign mounted against Slovenia, it has been more and more difficult to find a common ground around certain things. We were very disappointed to discover that Milosevic even had supporters in some of the most well known democratic circles of Belgrade. It's very difficult to have a ra12 tional discussion with them about the question of Kosovo or the Slovenian problem, because there is such emotional tension.
MH: Many of the independent movements that have appeared in Yugoslavia were organized in Slovenia, not only in Ljubljana, but also in other cities like Maribor, and even in little towns. Here there are generally environmental groups that come together around concrete ecological problems, such as nuclear power plants or pollution. Two feminist groups were formed in Ljubljana, along with gay groups, groups of pacifists and others.
All of these movements were organized under the cover of the Youth Alliance, or existing student or cultural associations that made it possible for them to organize
At the beginning, in 1983-84, the alternative movement in Ljubljana constituted a single group which later split into seven, each on a different theme. In Zagreb, the capital of Croatia, there is also a group that was founded three years ago. It had trouble legalizing its activities, and stayed underground for a while. As in Slovenia, the alternative groups existing in Croatian towns are mostly active around environmental
The Slovenian groups have very good relations with the Croatian ones, especially those in Zagreb. We're in the same boat, we've got the same worries. In other republics — like Bosnia, Serbia, Macedonia, or Montenegro — there aren't any organized alternative groups, only individuals.
The exception is Vojvodina, where some alternative groups - especially pacifists ecologists, but also human rights groups - have come together under the auspices of the youth organization, which is very liberal. They were very active two years ago when they set up a whole campaign against the construction of a new nuclear power plant, but their activity seems to have died down a bit recently. • Are you also in contact with the independent movements which exist in other Eastern European countries?
TM: In terms of the relationship between democratic or independent movements in Yugoslavia and similar movements in Eastern Europe, it has to be said that it was the pacifist movement in Ljubljana that played the central role in setting up these
This group has worked painstakingly to establish contact with the independent pacifist movements in all of the Eastern European countries, with the Hungarians, the Czechs, with the Poles and East Germans. And we are beginning to relate — at least in terms of written communication - to groups in the Soviet Union. We believe that these contacts are essential for a potential democratization of the Eastern bloc, and for any real democratic integration of
We understood that it would be very hard to set up an East-West dialogue, but we also realized that it would be even more difficult to set up an East-East one, and we've tried to work on it since 1985-86. We've organized forums and seminars together, sometimes legally and sometimes not. We are very glad to see that these independent movements are getting stronger and stronger. • Getting back to the independent movements in Yugoslavia itself, are these relationships between groups systematic in nature?
TM: We get in touch with any initiatives that arise, any time, anywhere. But the authorities do their best to prevent any hori zontal coordination between independent structures, whether these have a social, cultural, political, or labor focus. The powers that be encourage the division of Yugoslavia into hostile groupings, and at the same time want to artificially unite the country
MH: The best example of this social seg regation is the wave of miner's strikes in the last few years (see IV 118, April 20, 1987). It is hard to believe, but although these strikes broke out in every region of Yugoslavia, the miners had absolutely no ties with one another. Not one common structure ever saw the light of day.
BR: Between an atomized people, no real communication takes place. And insofar as the Committee for Justice has succeeded on this level, it is an important precedent. It has created a space for confident relations between individuals, destroying the ordinary distrust inspired by repression and informers. It's a completely new thing made possible because in Slovenia we are active
MH: That the independent movements of different republics share the same ideas and take initiatives together is very important, since the authorities always try to isolate each republic in order to pass movements off as nationalist. It's a very common tactic: any movement that appears in a given Yugoslavian, separatist and so on. So, it is very important that there are movements in Yugoslavia saying that it is a common struggle for democratization of political life in the country as a whole. • In Yugoslavia today, is the republic in danger of exploding?
TM: I would like to repeat once more that the political and social forces that are being attacked by official authorities and accused of wanting to destroy Yugoslavia are the only forces in a position to build real links between the different republics in the country on a democratic basis. And those who claim that they are the sole guarantee of the continued existence of Yugoslavia — the army for example — are destroying
Any unification by violent means would mean an escalation of conflicts that could in the very near future lead to the destruction of the country. But, unfortunately, this seems to be too difficult for some political forces to grasp. *