THE PUBLIC OPINION AND YUGOSLAVIA’S INTERNATIONAL POSITION
Even a superficial overview of the information concerning foreign policy
that is coming from the biggest part of the Yugoslav press and TV and radio
networks, especially those under state control, will show that there is
a big disparity between the real position and influence of FR Yugoslavia
in international relations and the image that the biggest portion of the
Yugoslav audience has with regard to the position and the influence of
the country. This is so not only with regard to a significant level of
isolation, sanctions, distant position with regard to international organizations
and institutions, the European integration processes, a significantly tightened
visa regime, etc. Actually, the Yugoslav public was generally unprepared
to accept and understand any new international status of the country that
would be essentially different from the one held by the former Yugoslavia,
even if there were no such problems as are those mentioned ones. The basic
problem is that exactly now, when integration process in the world are
getting stronger, when borders are becoming more relative and contacts
among countries are becoming more and more diversified, in our country
there is spreading the syndrome of closing up, xenophobia, mistrust and,
particularly, readiness to accuse other countries and international organizations
for all problems. Within this context, in Yugoslavia there is at work a
whole "industry" working to explain contemporary international relations
as a complex of negative appearances caused by the activity of the "world
mighty ones", secret services, etc. Events in the world of today are interpreted
through formulas from past centuries or from the Cold War period, with
particular mystification of geopolitics, namely the geopolitical and strategic
significance of the territory of Yugoslavia. In this, very obvious is the
endeavor to present all that was and is happening in the territory of the
former Yugoslavia as a part of a broad, almost planet-wide political, historical,
religious and civilization conflict.
The background of such an approach is clear - its aim is to make more
relative the responsibility of the domestic actors and to present the events
as an inevitable sequence of events which results from world developments
and depends on world factors upon which those domestic ones cannot influence,
or can influence only very little. Besides, actual developments are treated
as having an almost mystical character, as dependent from narrow circles
of the "world mighty ones", of different information agencies and, particularly,
dependent from the media. This, then, leads to the conclusion, that when
the internal factors of the crisis get on the agenda, the basic issue is
not the politics that they were or are still conducting, but
only the level of their ability to
announce their standpoints through world media, or to
influence in different ways the "world mighty ones". It is considered that
the main question is not what was the policy that was conducted, but rather
whether it was "correctly" presented in foreign media.
If for the moment we leave aside the sources and substance of the thesis
that there is an alleged interest of the international community and individual
countries to make harm exactly to FR Yugoslavia, we can look upon the concrete
negative consequences that are the result of such attitudes, widely spread
among the Yugoslav public opinion. The consequences are, inter alia, the
following:
1. Misunderstanding of the essence of contemporary international relations. The basis of changes in the world lies in inevitable internal changes that occurred in the former USSR and in countries in Eastern Europe. These changes are a result of objective processes within political and economic development of these countries, namely of the obsolete system that had been developing in them for years. The disintegration of the USSR and the Warsaw Pact represent only an inevitable consequence of such social developments, and not results of some plans and activity of the Western agencies and their East-European "assistants", as is often suggested in Yugoslavia.
2. Underestimating social, economic, political and other factors of changes in the contemporary world and overestimating marginal factors. Instead of asking for profound analysis of real causes of changes in the world and the necessity for us to participate in these changes or at least to adapt to them, our public opinion is mainly satisfied by getting clearly exaggerated emphasis on alleged conspiracies, clandestine agreements and activity of information and other agencies that are presented as almost the main driving force of historical processes.
3. Exaggerating the significance of the geographic area in which Yugoslavia is situated. In an era of scientific and technological achievements, formulas concerning the geostrategic importance of the Balkans as the "crossroads", the link between Europe and Asia, the road towards the "warm sees", etc. are mostly loosing their significance.
4. Disregard of the fact that the Cold War is over. Events in the world and in Yugoslavia are still explained exclusively through the optics of great power rivalry and their interests, the advance of some of them and retreat of the others, and the status and role of Russia and the USA are particularly an object of manipulation. There is an impression that there is an almost overt desire that relations between these two countries become tense and that some kind of conflict occurs, although in such a situation the consequences for FR Yugoslavia would be very negative. No doubt that there are serious problems in relations among influential countries, and hence also between Moscow and Washington, but the character of these relations is, however, essentially different when compared to the Cold War. Insisting upon geostrategic rivalry among the big powers and a desire for their conflict is paralyzing the ability to rationally and analytically understand the situation in the world, and the position of Yugoslavia in the new constellation.
5. The creation of the syndrome of a "besieged fortress". Yugoslavia’s coming out of isolation and her links with the world can hardly harmonize with spreading mistrust towards other countries and peoples, as well as international organizations and institutions. When all political activity in the country that does not suit the regime is immediately connected with "foreign orders", and embassies in Belgrade are labeled as centers from which leaders of opposition parties are getting "instructions for the destruction of the country", it is appropriate to ask why relations with other countries are maintained after all, and why is there, at the same time, the effort to build economic cooperation with those whose aim is the "destruction of Yugoslavia".
6. The creation of an anti-American and anti-Islamic attitude.
Agreement or disagreement with the politics of any state or statesman is
an extremely normal and legitimate occurrence in democratic societies.
However, this is not what this is all about; it is rather about very frequent
examples of rude offenses of certain countries, peoples and their political
representatives, as well as about giving most arbitrary statements on their
alleged intention to destroy other countries, peoples or even the entire
mankind (the alleged American plan to reduce the world’s population to
one billion by spreading contagious diseases, etc.). This does harm first
of all to the population of FR Yugoslavia, because the isolation of the
country is strengthened, relations with the world are deteriorated and
the country's own ability to realistically comprehend the problems that
exist in relations with certain countries are reduced. Western civilization
is often presented as adversary to ours although Yugoslavia, at least declaratory,
is striving - even if only partly - towards such a political and economic
system that exists in West European countries. All this is propaganda which
imposes upon the population of Yugoslavia an unnatural formula: hostility,
and even hatred, with regard to that part of the world with which Yugoslavia
has most developed economic and other connections, whose languages are
mostly spoken in Yugoslavia, in which hundreds of people from Yugoslavia
are working, and the majority of them is continuing to live normally in
these countries with a very tolerant attitude of the domestic population,
the employers, etc. The road to any kind of progress, and especially the
economic one, leads exactly to countries of western Europe which are simultaneously
accused of dangerous intentions with regard to the Balkans and Yugoslavia.
Thus, the connection is broken exactly with what is otherwise the goal:
economic, scientific and technological development.
Negative consequences has also the effort to present the developments
in the former Yugoslavia as an element of an world inter-religious and
civilization conflict in which the Serbian and Montenegrin peoples are
presented as either the line of defense of Orthodoxy from Catholicism and
the West in general, or the line of defense of Christianity from Islam
- depending on the variant. Such an approach secures an alibi for any step
in the times of crisis and war, because any political and other activity,
based in essence upon nationalism, is given the aureole of religious or
civilizational struggle, and every actor is feeling like a participant
in a decisive world civilizational fight. Thus, again, individual responsibility
is shifted to the terrain of alleged general, planetary contradictions
and conflicts. Besides, all this is strengthening the inter-religious and
inter-ethnic animosities, which can be fatal in multi-ethnic societies.
7. A hard adaptation to the country’s own size, influence and realistic position. Contemporary Yugoslavia is not only smaller than the former one, but has also an essentially different international position - both because of her own problems and status, as well as because of objective circumstances. She has no longer the significance of a country between two blocs and does not have the specific position and influence which had significantly exceeded her size. Therefore, the country will have to adapt to a more modest position and role, especially in view of the need to secure for herself first of all a place in international organizations and get out from isolation. However, among the Yugoslav public opinion there is a rather spread "superiority" complex, namely the inclination to overestimate the own significance and to underestimate other countries and peoples. For instance, it is very often spoken about Yugoslavia as a key country or the "key factor" in the Balkans. It is forgotten that, for instance, Romania - a country twice the size of Yugoslavia both with regard to territory as well as population, and with a significantly more favorable status in international relations than FRY - is also situated in the Balkans. Some other countries are also similar to Yugoslavia according to some parameters, and according to some others they are even higher ranking. Also, it can frequently be heard and read that Yugoslavia is "not a banana republic (obviously, the comparison has in mind Central American banana exporting countries), or that she is not "some African country". The question is what gives the right to underestimate and disdain any country in the world, particularly because practically all countries of Central America or Africa nowadays have a more favorable international status than Yugoslavia. Generally speaking, the biggest part of our media is characterized by a terminology which is presenting the relations among countries and peoples in the spirit of competition, race, victory and defeat, rather than in the spirit of tolerance and cooperation. Thus, even in sport commentaries it can be frequently read that Yugoslavia has "smashed", "broken" or "humiliated" someone. By using such formulations, the population is even unconsciously beginning to create a hostile attitude towards other countries and peoples, and relations with them are understood as a constant competition and struggle.
8. Selectivity in informing about the world. Reports concerning international events in a significant part of the Yugoslav media, and particularly on state television, increasingly resemble reports in the former Soviet Union. Some events are simply kept secret, others are presented one-sidedly. An effort is made to create black images of the world and an impression that there is a general negative trend in internal developments in many countries, as well as in international relations in general. In a way, our internal problems and difficulties are projected upon reports on world events. Special emphasis is placed upon economic difficulties of developed countries, and particularly problems of countries in transition. All this, however, is done less with the aim to give objective information, and much more in the service of internal daily political needs. Namely, the worse and more serious the situation in other countries is, the easier it is to explain internal economic and social problems. Thus, for instance, it can often be read that there are allegedly serious economic and social difficulties and uncertain perspectives in Slovenia, etc. Such selectivity leads to a false image concerning certain events. Thus, for instance, the Yugoslav public opinion is informed about Iraq in a way which represents this country almost exclusively as a victim of foreign pressure and sanctions, while little mention is made about Iraqi actions which provoked such international reaction. In reports from countries in Eastern Europe much more attention is paid to "dark" sides of the transition process, while positive results are, as a rule, minimized, etc. All this leads to a very specifically distorted image of the surrounding world that the Yugoslav public opinion is getting.
Results of such propaganda oriented political activity certainly have a negative reflection upon relations of Yugoslavia with some countries and organizations. It is an illusion to think that numerous insults directed towards certain countries and their statesmen - and, as a rule, it is exactly those countries that should be the key political and economic partners of FRY - that have been coming from pages of some newspapers were not and are not noticed. The right to approach any country’s policy in a critical way cannot be denied; what is disputable, however, is the principle of false information, hushing up, one-sided orientation of the public opinion and using terminology that exceeds frameworks of correctness and decency. However, it is the citizens of Yugoslavia themselves that have to bear the most harsh consequences here, because a distorted consciousness with regard to realities and processes in the surrounding world is being created - and to a significant extent has already been established - and thus our ability to join world trends is essentially diminished.
No sensible and realistic analyst will deny that the situation in the world, as well as in individual countries, is a complicated one and that there are many contradicting, and even crisis processes both on the regional and global level. However, there are also very essential positive elements, such as elimination of bloc confrontation, democratic transformation of many countries, strengthening of integrative processes and an accelerated scientific-technological progress. In such a situation criteria concerning the international position, influence and significance, as well as of success of individual countries are changing. Some key criteria from the period of "balance of forces", or Cold War - such as military power, territories, borders, complete control of the economic space and even such principles as sovereignty or non-interference into internal affairs - are becoming relative. The main criteria for success and strengthening of a position of a certain country are becoming its economic and technological development and, particularly, the ability to improve the conditions of life for its citizens and to secure the respect of their rights. Within this context the integrative processes are somewhat limiting the sovereignty of even the most developed countries, which transfer part of their competencies to the international bodies. Admittance to international organizations and integrations implies adherence to accepted norms and an international control of their implementation also in those domains that would earlier before be understood as exclusively internal affairs of a given country. Borders between many countries are becoming relative, and differences in economic activities are fading away. Numerous problems are getting solved exclusively on the international, and not the national level. The rights of citizens and the development of a civic society are getting priority over making the nation and state a fetish and absolute value. It is clear that these processes do not develop in an ideal way, straightforward and without distortions, but the only perspective for progress is that the country is joining these processes, and not confronting them on its own expense and to the detriment of its citizens. The basic condition for this is, first of all, an internal analysis and adaptation, namely securing internal political and economic conditions for joining European and more global integrations, and not a constant accusation of others and search for all explanations in activities of "foreign factors". The contemporary world, however, is not formed by agreements behind the scene, secret meetings and information agencies - as is often presented to us - but by many, more serious and deeper, social processes. The thesis on a contemporary "uni-polar" system can be a correct one only if the issue is approached from the logic of the XIX century or the Cold War. However, the very logic itself has changed. Changes in the world were not caused by activities or violence exercised by one super-power, but by the fact that one system of social relations, based upon political democracy, pluralism and market economy - with all its deficiencies - has proven to be more vital and more successful than any other. Hence, this is not about anyone’s dictate and imposition, but a historical process which can be slowed down or postponed by artificial barriers, but it cannot be evaded. Inclusion into such processes is no doubt in the interest of Yugoslavia and her citizens. One of the conditions for this is also objective, correct and professional information of the public about everything that is really going on in the world.
