[ Serbia ]

Serbia is stepping up pressure on Kosovo and countries who recognised the independence of Kosovo, recalling the Serbian ambassadors from Berlin, Vienna, Paris, Rome, Berlin, Ankara, and Washington. Two border crossing points were set on fire at the border line between Serbia and Kosovo (cf. CNN Video Report) and a big demonstration is planned today in Belgrade. The EU nevertheless, wants to keep the door open for Serbia.

"What sort of solution is it to isolate oneself, to become a kind of Belorussia in the Balkans? What sort of perspective is this, given the spirit of integration that governs our epoch? And what does it say about our compatibility with our neighbours and with a world that is changing so fast?", wonders the historian Latinka Perovic.

Latinka Perovi? is - according to the Bosnian Institute - one of Serbia?s most respected historians, was secretary of the Serbian Communist Party until the purge of ?liberals? in 1972. The Bosnian Institute sees her as "one of the most consistent and courageous critics of Serbian expansionism" and publishes translated extracts from an interview conducted by Darko Hudelist and published in Globus (Zagreb) on 8 February 2008. Here are some quotes from this interview:

Question: How far back does the fatal division in Serbia go between Westerners and Easterners, modernisers and patriarchalists?

L. Perovic: The turning point, in my view, came with the acquisition of state independence at the Congress of Berlin in 1878. Two political programmatic orientations came to be articulated at that time. One orientation was concerned with development of the actual state within its given borders, i.e. with its modernisation, its internal development. The people of this orientation looked for support in Austria-Hungary, which in fact stood for the West: they were for a modern state, for rule of law, for building the relevant institutions, for individual rights and representative democracy. The other tendency was represented by the Serbian socialists, who quickly turned into Radicals. They focussed on creating a Great Serb state. The orientation towards Russia as the centre of Slavdom was the ideological foundation stone of the National Radical Party as the first political party in Serbia. (...)

This West-East division, i.e. the concept of a national peasant state, was present in the nineteenth century, stimulated wars, was taken into the first Yugoslavia, continued to exist within the Serbian Communist party, and made itself strongly felt also in the second Yugoslavia. It manifested itself in the most dramatic form in the 1970s, and largely determined what happened in the 1980s and 1990s.

(...)

The Radicals are not a party created on the margins of Yugoslavia?s break-up, nor a consequence of transition, although part of the frustrated and dissatisfied masses do rally to this parry. The Radical Party is an authentic Serbian party with a continuous history (...). It seeks alteration of borders and union of all Serbs. That is a policy which is historically spent, archaic and in conflict with the times, but which is also authentic and consistent - something that explains its great success among the electorate. (...) A growing number of young and educated people are joining the Radical Party. It is the only party that is active throughout the country, including the socially marginalised and the most backward village. They have a powerful organisation that is a significant force.

(...)

Question: How do you view the great expectations which many Serbs have of Russia?

L. Perovic: They have a dual nature. First, we Serbs have always expected more of Russia that it could or wished to fulfill. Russia, after all, is a big power and we are a small nation. Secondly, our relationship to Russia suffers from megalomania. In this Slav world opposed to Western civilisation, the Serbs always saw themselves as occupying a place just behind Russia, which is not at all realistic. The consequences that follow from this are potentially very dangerous for Serbia. What sort of solution is it to isolate oneself, to become a kind of Belorussia in the Balkans? What sort of perspective is this, given the spirit of integration that governs our epoch? And what does it say about our compatibility with our neighbours and with a world that is changing so fast?