SRS deputy leader: I'm no Milošević

To B92:

I am intrigued and somewhat amused by your description of the Radical Party as "far-right". Living in Western Europe, it seems to me that the terms "right-wing" and "left-wing" have long ceased to have any meaning. If the Radicals were a party in Ireland or Britain, they would probably be described as far-left, based on their policies and their identification with Russia. In fact the LDP would be the right-wing party given their devotion to free-market thinking. So if I was you in B92 I would think twice before using these convenient but meaningless terms.

Another one is "ultranationalist", also applied to the SRS and sometimes to the DSS. During the conflict in Northern Ireland, the political voice of the IRA was a party called Sinn Fein ("ourselves"). Their struggle was for a united Ireland by force of arms if necessary. Yet they were never described as "ultranationalists" but "republicans". In fact it was the moderates who wanted to unite Ireland by constitutional means who were called "nationalists". The term "ultranationalist" as applied to Serbia was coined by the western powers and for B92 to use it is to use the language of those who bombed your country. It would be fair to describe the SRS as nationalists but not as a term of abuse. In Ireland such a description is actually a compliment.

See what I'm getting at?

I agree with him. he is not like Milosevic he is even worse. He will destroy everything that was tried to be build for the last 9 years. If he wins elections, which is a hight probability, only god can help Serbia. Everybody else is going to be declared by Nikolic as enemies. Serbia is already 20 years behind the rest of Europe, and him and Kostunica, for that matter, are going to send Serbia back to middle ages where only killing, robbing and hatereds for the others, are going to be the way do run politics. Pity Pity Pity.

I agree with Tom O'Donoghue, parroting western powers smear campaign of the opposition to their definition of "democrazy", wont do any good for the credibility of B92.

Nikolic is honest and clear with his intentions to do whatever is good for Serbia, not her aggressors , B92 should try that too whatever it´s position on the matter..

Tom my friend, you could not have said it better. The terms "far-right", "ultra-nationalist", and whatnots are largely the catagories of Western observers.

I hold little love for Nikolic or the SRS, but given what they stand for, and more importantly the electoral support they receive, the best term to describe them is "national populist".

Looking at all the brochures they've been handing out on the streets in Belgrade, I've found little to no "nationalism" in their campaigns. Rather, they speak of ending corruption, calling for fairer wages, improvement in city conditions such as more bridges over the Danube and Sava, and a general disdain for elitism.

Probably the most important reason for the "populist" label is the large support they receive. Nikolic CAN'T simply be nationalist if he gets 1/3 of the Serbian electorate. He HAS to be more mainstram in order to attract a diverse voting public. Say what you want about him, he has successfully transformed a party that was neo-fascist under Seselj into a legitimate, law abiding party that follows democratic parliamentary rules of law. Whether that makes him more dangerous than Milosevic is up for debate.

Nikolić is good for Serbia and its people at an internal level however, he would do no good for Serbian international relations. Therfore the DSS should take care of external matters.

As the DS lean too far to the West, the SRS lean too far to the East so the DSS provide a nice balance. The benefit for Nikolić now is the West have made it clear they intend to rip Serbia apart while Russia is protecting us! So it's his turn to form a government that will protect Serbia.

it looks like Nikolić still is living in the 80ies - and in fact - he represents the ex-yu generation, which has failded completely in solving the problems three decades ago. how could such a man manage the challanges of the future? on Sunday we will know more, but results of the elections are not the solution of the massive national problems yet. Serbia suffers already from weak leadership in economical terms - who wants some more years like that?

I hope for further elections and E.U. under constant pressure. This is the fast-lane.

Tom,
I agree. Terms like 'ultranationalist' were invented by the Christiane Amanpours of this world (ie...ignorant journalists who never let the facts get in the way of a good story). Those terms are parroted by news agencies and governments in order to demonize the Serbs. There is nothing 'ultranationalist' about the SRS, DSS, Kostunica, or Nikolic.

Mike,
I take exception to your reference to the SRS as 'neo-fascist'. They were never neo-fascist, and I challenge you to tell me what part of their agenda was neo-fascist? Not bowing to outside anti-Serbian forces does not make you 'neo-fascist'. Serbs never attacked another country, which the Americans do all the time. Serbs never napalmed whole villages and killed a million civilians. Serbs never made up twilight zone type WMD stories in order to justify their military aggression. Serbia is a multicultural country where ethnic minorities have always lived in harmony, and it still is today. How is the SRS against this? And who really are the neo-fascists here?

"I take exception to your reference to the SRS as 'neo-fascist'. They were never neo-fascist, and I challenge you to tell me what part of their agenda was neo-fascist?"

Dragan,

My reference to the SRS as "neo-fascist" is primarily reserved for Seselj's tenure as party head, not Nikolic's.

Under Seselj in the 1990s, the SRS was the only political party that openly campaigned for the creation of a Greater Serbian state by any means necessary. This often meant at the expense of other nationalities in Serbia as well as in other parts of ex-YU. Furthermore, not only did SRS MUPs actively participate in the fighting, but Seselj himself went to the front, something Milosevic never did. The SRS's involvement with the White Eagles attests to the aggressiveness of its early incarnations. Now whether or not Seselj himself actually did anything provocative beyond pulling out his gun in parliament and threatening to shoot student protesters is still up for decison, but in my opinion the man is a maniac and the pre-Nikolic SRS was openly promoting a militarized and centralized Greater Serbia.

Fascism in my book is measured by ideology, not in the number of napalm bombs dropped or conspriacy theories hatched.

So again, in comparing the SRS under Seselj with the SRS under Nikolic, I'd say the party has made huge strides in shedding it previous aggression for more populist rhetoric. There's tons of things I admire and respect about Serbia and the Serbian people, but Seselj isn't one of them.

Probably even Putin is shaking his head in disbelief. Is this guy crazy, or what? Who is he threatening?
The part that he would have gone all the way (against NATO) is the best.

finally things are getting clearer.. In This interview Mr.Nikolic has been very sanguine..
So if he wins the election from May 11 red code for Nato troops in Kosovo + Serbia SAA will be used in the WC + possible wars with all the countries that bordered Serbia..
Interesting days seems to me in the Balkans...

If Nikolic doesn't want to be compared with Milosevic, he must change his behavior. What about his comparison with Seselj&company?!

Def. by Encarta :: Ultranationalism
extreme nationalism: nationalism that is so extreme as to be detrimental to international interests or cooperation.

HC Foir Human Rights In Serbia(quote) ::

The glorification of the traditional, "authentic" Serbian values and a continuing political and media campaign against Europe and the West have resulted in a wide skepticism towards the Western democratic practices. They have resulted in the new identity matrix of the Serb nation as a historically correct nation, victimized by the world powers. That self-induced delusion has not only paved the way for an immoral conduct, but has also freed the nation from all the wrongs of the past and those possible in the future. The new mind-set, removed from reality, has plunged the nation into a permanent conflict with its neighbors and the rest of the world, generating frustration, arrogance and aggression. The rabid nationalism has thus devastated the social fiber of the nation. Compounded by the lack of will to confront the recent past, including by bringing to justice war criminals, it has almost destroyed the country's potential for a democratic transition and the creation of a modern state.

I assume his primary aim would be to get Kosovo back. He will never get it with a pro-Russia anti-West policy.

The 'all the way' statement implies use of force - if it doesn't then he has no policy and is talking in the past.

The only way he could use force successfully would be to do it legally - and that would involve getting the western press to label its politicians as wrong and Serbia as right.

If his party wanted to use force, they would have to do it with legal weight and call the west's bluff. He does not have the political ability to handle the complexities of this policy and it would soon degenerate into a mess. The only way this man would go 'all the way' would be to keep walking around his own prison cell.

Serbian Police intervention in Kosovo can have a legal basis - the UDI is anti 1244 and Serbia does have a right to protect its territory - particularly if 1244 is interpreted as having passed its era of application.

However, pragmatically, the situation is more complicated than just sending in a few ethnic cleansers - NATO will not allow that to happen.

There is no constructive reason to follow the policy described in this article. Russia is not going to start a world war to suit the radicals.

You do not have to be a 'nationalist' to believe that Kosovo should remain part of Serbia. However, the kind of nationalism that excludes the human rights of others and results in death and destruction is not good for Serbia's reputation and would effectively be an invitation for more western involvement - not less.

I do not see any reason to confuse the Kosovo situation with the EU. Linkage is unnecessary and will achieve nothing - these should be kept as separate issues.

Nikolić also said that he would never hand over the most-wanted Bosnian Serb war crimes fugitives — former political leader Radovan Karadžić and General Ratko Mladić — to the Hague Tribunal.

"I would never deliver them" Nikolić said. "I will not lie LIKE KOSTUNICA AND TADIC and say I'm searching for them. I will say I'm not looking for them."
HONESTY WILL BE RESPECTED.

Tom O'Donoghue,

It's easy to spot your agenda. You'll make a fine Peter Handke II. But if you know anything about political theory and you want to be honest, this is the origins of RIGHT and LEFT in politics:

"The terms Left and Right have been used to refer to political affiliation since the early part of the French Revolutionary era. They originally referred to the seating arrangements in the various legislative bodies of France, specifically in the French Legislative Assembly of 1791, when the king was still the formal head of state, and the moderate royalist Feuillants sat on the right side of the chamber, while the radical Montagnards sat on the left.[1] This traditional seating arrangement continues to be observed by the Senate and National Assembly of the French Fifth Republic.

Originally, the defining point on the ideological spectrum were the attitudes towards the ancien régime ("old order"). "The Right" thus implied support for aristocratic, royal, or clerical interests, while "The Left" implied opposition to the same. At that time, support for laissez-faire capitalism and free markets were regarded as being on the left whereas today in most Western countries these views would be characterized as being on the Right."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-right_politics

Right wingers wants to have aboslute powers, while left wingers wants democracy and rule of law.
Nationalism goes against rule of law. Nationalism is a tribalist system ment protect the people on top. Putin, Bush, Nikolic, Chavez, they are all the same.

"I would never deliver them" even if they were, Nikolić said. "I will not lie and say I'm searching for them. I will say I'm not looking for them."

We all know that all your Gov.t lie on this issue- you never looked for them.

Anyhow what's all this fear from a trial? if they have done nothing wrong? just go and say that you were fighting for teh freadom of your peaople and did nothing wrong.

Take example from Haradinaj.

I agree with him. he is not like Milosevic he is even worse. He will destroy everything that was tried to be build for the last 9 years. If he wins elections, which is a hight probability, only god can help Serbia. Everybody else is going to be declared by Nikolic as enemies. Serbia is already 20 years behind the rest of Europe, and him and Kostunica, for that matter, are going to send Serbia back to middle ages where only killing, robbing and hatereds for the others, are going to be the way do run politics. Pity Pity Pity.

it looks like Nikolić still is living in the 80ies - and in fact - he represents the ex-yu generation, which has failded completely in solving the problems three decades ago. how could such a man manage the challanges of the future? on Sunday we will know more, but results of the elections are not the solution of the massive national problems yet. Serbia suffers already from weak leadership in economical terms - who wants some more years like that?

Probably even Putin is shaking his head in disbelief. Is this guy crazy, or what? Who is he threatening?
The part that he would have gone all the way (against NATO) is the best.

If Nikolic doesn't want to be compared with Milosevic, he must change his behavior. What about his comparison with Seselj&company?!

finally things are getting clearer.. In This interview Mr.Nikolic has been very sanguine..
So if he wins the election from May 11 red code for Nato troops in Kosovo + Serbia SAA will be used in the WC + possible wars with all the countries that bordered Serbia..
Interesting days seems to me in the Balkans...

Nikolić also said that he would never hand over the most-wanted Bosnian Serb war crimes fugitives — former political leader Radovan Karadžić and General Ratko Mladić — to the Hague Tribunal.

"I would never deliver them" Nikolić said. "I will not lie LIKE KOSTUNICA AND TADIC and say I'm searching for them. I will say I'm not looking for them."
HONESTY WILL BE RESPECTED.

Tom my friend, you could not have said it better. The terms "far-right", "ultra-nationalist", and whatnots are largely the catagories of Western observers.

I hold little love for Nikolic or the SRS, but given what they stand for, and more importantly the electoral support they receive, the best term to describe them is "national populist".

Looking at all the brochures they've been handing out on the streets in Belgrade, I've found little to no "nationalism" in their campaigns. Rather, they speak of ending corruption, calling for fairer wages, improvement in city conditions such as more bridges over the Danube and Sava, and a general disdain for elitism.

Probably the most important reason for the "populist" label is the large support they receive. Nikolic CAN'T simply be nationalist if he gets 1/3 of the Serbian electorate. He HAS to be more mainstram in order to attract a diverse voting public. Say what you want about him, he has successfully transformed a party that was neo-fascist under Seselj into a legitimate, law abiding party that follows democratic parliamentary rules of law. Whether that makes him more dangerous than Milosevic is up for debate.

Def. by Encarta :: Ultranationalism
extreme nationalism: nationalism that is so extreme as to be detrimental to international interests or cooperation.

HC Foir Human Rights In Serbia(quote) ::

The glorification of the traditional, "authentic" Serbian values and a continuing political and media campaign against Europe and the West have resulted in a wide skepticism towards the Western democratic practices. They have resulted in the new identity matrix of the Serb nation as a historically correct nation, victimized by the world powers. That self-induced delusion has not only paved the way for an immoral conduct, but has also freed the nation from all the wrongs of the past and those possible in the future. The new mind-set, removed from reality, has plunged the nation into a permanent conflict with its neighbors and the rest of the world, generating frustration, arrogance and aggression. The rabid nationalism has thus devastated the social fiber of the nation. Compounded by the lack of will to confront the recent past, including by bringing to justice war criminals, it has almost destroyed the country's potential for a democratic transition and the creation of a modern state.

To B92:

I am intrigued and somewhat amused by your description of the Radical Party as "far-right". Living in Western Europe, it seems to me that the terms "right-wing" and "left-wing" have long ceased to have any meaning. If the Radicals were a party in Ireland or Britain, they would probably be described as far-left, based on their policies and their identification with Russia. In fact the LDP would be the right-wing party given their devotion to free-market thinking. So if I was you in B92 I would think twice before using these convenient but meaningless terms.

Another one is "ultranationalist", also applied to the SRS and sometimes to the DSS. During the conflict in Northern Ireland, the political voice of the IRA was a party called Sinn Fein ("ourselves"). Their struggle was for a united Ireland by force of arms if necessary. Yet they were never described as "ultranationalists" but "republicans". In fact it was the moderates who wanted to unite Ireland by constitutional means who were called "nationalists". The term "ultranationalist" as applied to Serbia was coined by the western powers and for B92 to use it is to use the language of those who bombed your country. It would be fair to describe the SRS as nationalists but not as a term of abuse. In Ireland such a description is actually a compliment.

See what I'm getting at?

I assume his primary aim would be to get Kosovo back. He will never get it with a pro-Russia anti-West policy.

The 'all the way' statement implies use of force - if it doesn't then he has no policy and is talking in the past.

The only way he could use force successfully would be to do it legally - and that would involve getting the western press to label its politicians as wrong and Serbia as right.

If his party wanted to use force, they would have to do it with legal weight and call the west's bluff. He does not have the political ability to handle the complexities of this policy and it would soon degenerate into a mess. The only way this man would go 'all the way' would be to keep walking around his own prison cell.

Serbian Police intervention in Kosovo can have a legal basis - the UDI is anti 1244 and Serbia does have a right to protect its territory - particularly if 1244 is interpreted as having passed its era of application.

However, pragmatically, the situation is more complicated than just sending in a few ethnic cleansers - NATO will not allow that to happen.

There is no constructive reason to follow the policy described in this article. Russia is not going to start a world war to suit the radicals.

You do not have to be a 'nationalist' to believe that Kosovo should remain part of Serbia. However, the kind of nationalism that excludes the human rights of others and results in death and destruction is not good for Serbia's reputation and would effectively be an invitation for more western involvement - not less.

I do not see any reason to confuse the Kosovo situation with the EU. Linkage is unnecessary and will achieve nothing - these should be kept as separate issues.

I hope for further elections and E.U. under constant pressure. This is the fast-lane.

I agree with Tom O'Donoghue, parroting western powers smear campaign of the opposition to their definition of "democrazy", wont do any good for the credibility of B92.

Nikolic is honest and clear with his intentions to do whatever is good for Serbia, not her aggressors , B92 should try that too whatever it´s position on the matter..

Nikolić is good for Serbia and its people at an internal level however, he would do no good for Serbian international relations. Therfore the DSS should take care of external matters.

As the DS lean too far to the West, the SRS lean too far to the East so the DSS provide a nice balance. The benefit for Nikolić now is the West have made it clear they intend to rip Serbia apart while Russia is protecting us! So it's his turn to form a government that will protect Serbia.

Tom,
I agree. Terms like 'ultranationalist' were invented by the Christiane Amanpours of this world (ie...ignorant journalists who never let the facts get in the way of a good story). Those terms are parroted by news agencies and governments in order to demonize the Serbs. There is nothing 'ultranationalist' about the SRS, DSS, Kostunica, or Nikolic.

Mike,
I take exception to your reference to the SRS as 'neo-fascist'. They were never neo-fascist, and I challenge you to tell me what part of their agenda was neo-fascist? Not bowing to outside anti-Serbian forces does not make you 'neo-fascist'. Serbs never attacked another country, which the Americans do all the time. Serbs never napalmed whole villages and killed a million civilians. Serbs never made up twilight zone type WMD stories in order to justify their military aggression. Serbia is a multicultural country where ethnic minorities have always lived in harmony, and it still is today. How is the SRS against this? And who really are the neo-fascists here?

"I take exception to your reference to the SRS as 'neo-fascist'. They were never neo-fascist, and I challenge you to tell me what part of their agenda was neo-fascist?"

Dragan,

My reference to the SRS as "neo-fascist" is primarily reserved for Seselj's tenure as party head, not Nikolic's.

Under Seselj in the 1990s, the SRS was the only political party that openly campaigned for the creation of a Greater Serbian state by any means necessary. This often meant at the expense of other nationalities in Serbia as well as in other parts of ex-YU. Furthermore, not only did SRS MUPs actively participate in the fighting, but Seselj himself went to the front, something Milosevic never did. The SRS's involvement with the White Eagles attests to the aggressiveness of its early incarnations. Now whether or not Seselj himself actually did anything provocative beyond pulling out his gun in parliament and threatening to shoot student protesters is still up for decison, but in my opinion the man is a maniac and the pre-Nikolic SRS was openly promoting a militarized and centralized Greater Serbia.

Fascism in my book is measured by ideology, not in the number of napalm bombs dropped or conspriacy theories hatched.

So again, in comparing the SRS under Seselj with the SRS under Nikolic, I'd say the party has made huge strides in shedding it previous aggression for more populist rhetoric. There's tons of things I admire and respect about Serbia and the Serbian people, but Seselj isn't one of them.

Tom O'Donoghue,

It's easy to spot your agenda. You'll make a fine Peter Handke II. But if you know anything about political theory and you want to be honest, this is the origins of RIGHT and LEFT in politics:

"The terms Left and Right have been used to refer to political affiliation since the early part of the French Revolutionary era. They originally referred to the seating arrangements in the various legislative bodies of France, specifically in the French Legislative Assembly of 1791, when the king was still the formal head of state, and the moderate royalist Feuillants sat on the right side of the chamber, while the radical Montagnards sat on the left.[1] This traditional seating arrangement continues to be observed by the Senate and National Assembly of the French Fifth Republic.

Originally, the defining point on the ideological spectrum were the attitudes towards the ancien régime ("old order"). "The Right" thus implied support for aristocratic, royal, or clerical interests, while "The Left" implied opposition to the same. At that time, support for laissez-faire capitalism and free markets were regarded as being on the left whereas today in most Western countries these views would be characterized as being on the Right."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-right_politics

Right wingers wants to have aboslute powers, while left wingers wants democracy and rule of law.
Nationalism goes against rule of law. Nationalism is a tribalist system ment protect the people on top. Putin, Bush, Nikolic, Chavez, they are all the same.

"I would never deliver them" even if they were, Nikolić said. "I will not lie and say I'm searching for them. I will say I'm not looking for them."

We all know that all your Gov.t lie on this issue- you never looked for them.

Anyhow what's all this fear from a trial? if they have done nothing wrong? just go and say that you were fighting for teh freadom of your peaople and did nothing wrong.

Take example from Haradinaj.