interview by Sanjin BECIRAGIC
SCHILLING: I met Sarovic twice before the November elections. I told him that I was absolutely dissatisfied. That mayors who belong to his party did not work in accordance with the Dayton Peace Agreement and that they hadn't opened their municipalities to the mass return of people. He told me that he agreed that that had to change. He gave me some names of people in Bijeljina and Bratunac that I should visit. I must say that today there are younger mayors, members of the SDS who are much more responsible and faster respond to my requests. If one allows a political party to nominate candidates in an election, one has to accept the results of that election. One cannot after the election say - I do not like this party. If there was something bad in that party, then it is necessary to focus on that party. If that party does not work in accordance with the Constitution, then that must be stopped. But after the election, I think that one has to talk to the population and respect the will of the voters.
Does that mean that the American ambassador in BH, Thomas Miller, and the U.S. administration, respectively, are wrong when they threaten to deny assistance to the RS if members of the SDS are included in the government?
The U.S. does not have to offer her support, so that that can change. But, political matters should not prevent that, because we have to respect laws. If we do not respect both the will of the people and laws, then no one will respect them. We have to build trust. If some members of this party have committed crimes, they must be punished and go to the Hague. But I cannot simply say - I do not want to talk to them. We must talk to them.
Is there a conflict within the international community in BH?
There are different opinions regarding the national parties. For example, the HDZ or the SDS. I also did not like the November elections. That is why I proposed that the elections be postponed. My suggestion was not accepted and we have these results. But, we cannot now say, we do not like the results and therefore, we shall stop cooperation. That is impossible. We must increase trust in institutions, rather than in personalities.
Is there a conflict between the U.S. ambassador and the High Representative in BH? I ask you this question because they obviously have different views of the role of the SDS in BH.
I am not an expert for the personal struggles within the international community. I go to the spot, and only sometimes hear about what is going on. And when I hear that, then I only wish to say that the elections should not have been held.
What does that mean?
If someone thinks that it is now possible to manipulate and say do this or that, then he is not satisfied with the election results. That is not how I work. I think that we simply must accept the election results.
Does that mean that a coalition between the PDP and the SDS in RS should be accepted as something "ordinary"?
I think that a government must have a majority in the Parliament. The situation in RS before the election was catastrophic. The government had no majority. There was no government that would be supported by a majority of representatives in the Parliament and the result of that was permanent political stagnation. If they form coalitions I believe that things will be better. The younger generation in the SDS does not see itself as Karadzic's followers. If you talk to them, they admit that that was a very bad period. And really, I wish the SDS changed its name. That would be better. The Hungarian Minister of Foreign Affairs used to be a member of the Communist Party. He felt the spirit of the modern democracy and changed the name of his party. The same can happen in RS. One cannot say to someone from the SDS - why are you a member of that party? You must be a bad politician. I cannot say that to them, because I've met these people. I had positive conversations with Mr. Sarovic. I asked him: do you believe that the laws are important and that they are in accordance with the Dayton Agreement? Do you implement laws enacted by the Parliament in your entity? Yes, we are making changes and doing that, that's what he said.
In June 2000, you spent some time in BH as well. At the time you stated in Sarajevo that exactly 126 years would be needed for all the expelled non-Serbs to return to RS. Have you changed your estimate in the meantime?
That calculation was based on the time needed to process a request for return. These requests were not treated in normal manner. They were submitted in one office and only three to four cases could be resolved each day. That becomes a problem when there are 5000 requests. I would now say that five years would be needed. In normal circumstances, only a year or two would be needed. Now, this process is speeding up. They are implementing property laws. Now, you can talk to the leaders in RS about the return of refugees. Two or three years ago they used to say that not a single refugee would return in this region. That property would be exchanged. If you visit Prijedor and some other municipalities, you'll see that they support return.
However, the first session of the new RS Parliament had a miserable start. Representatives of the SDP, the Party for BH, and the SDA left the session in protest. Does that seem like a change to you?
That is a tradition. Political parties leave the Parliament if they cannot reach an agreement. I think that everyone has the right to demonstrate disagreement with something. But that is not a solution. The solution is to work together. I've been doing that here for five years now. People must talk. I explained to the local politicians that I am a mediator and that I can do my job by talking to the parties. You have to discover common interests and how to get people together and go forward.
When I listen to you, I get the impression that you are satisfied with your achievements during the last five years.
I am. In comparison with earlier years of struggle and obstruction, the situation in the municipalities is better. I used to push for the return of 20 refugee families. Now thousands of people are going back. I am satisfied because I believe that those doors opened thanks to my efforts.
Nevertheless, refugees and displaced persons, even after five years and your persistent talks still live in 90 collective centers in BH. Of course, it should not be forgotten that tent settlements still exist. Why isn't anyone, not even you, solving that?
There is certain ineptitude of the current authorities in their attempts to solve those problems. Some do not want to solve these problems because they are pleased with the current situation. Croats in Stolac maintained such situation with Croat refugees. They kept them in refugee camps so that they could show the visitors how badly they live. I thing that the fact that refugees cannot find work is a much bigger problem. That is the worst problem. It is also a desperately urgent problem that young people want to escape from this state. The local politicians are not thinking about how to keep young people in BH and how to provide them with better perspectives. That is much more worrisome than whether some political party is talking to another political party.
You also referred to Mostar as "the black hole" of the Dayton Agreement in the past. It seems that the situation has improved. Do you think that the HDZ and Ante Jelavic will enable the progress of that city?
Ante Jelavic now feels that he is quite powerful because of the results of the recent elections, but he is also thinking about how to respect the BH institutions. The HDZ is in a difficult situation because it includes hardliners. But it also includes more moderate politicians. We shall see how they will balance their policies. If Jelavic is smart, he will transform the HDZ. He may split the party in two in the next two or four years. The people will ask what he will have done for an ordinary person. Such things are criticized and the HDZ will end up in a difficult situation because they are responsible. If one manipulates the situation that is a shortcut, something that is near term and cannot be sustained in the future.
Does that mean that the HDZ victory is a manipulation with the people?
No. I do think that they won the people over to their side because of a lack of intelligent moves by the international community. If one keeps demonstrating dislike for the HDZ and open support for other parties, that will provoke a reaction by the people. And then the people will say: we do not want that. I think that that was not an intelligent move, but I fear that we shall see more mistakes because of too much meddling. We must have independent parties and the international community must not meddle. If they break laws, they must react, not us. We must be a part of the educational process and show that if we dislike something, we nevertheless stick to the institutions and laws. Otherwise, there will be no trust. But these people are willing. If you do not push them.
Yes, but without pushing, there would be no freedom of movement or even the end of killing, the two things you characterized as two biggest successes of the international community during the five years of development of the Dayton BH? But, whatever. Tell us, what is the biggest failure?
Organized crime is the biggest problem. Corruption and crime are present at all government levels in BH. The struggle against crime in this state is going slowly because no one is engaging that problem systematically. From the state level to the municipalities. Or the other way round. That is why you now have parallel corrupt institutions. We must eliminate criminal elements and ensure the implementation of laws. We chose to do that only bit by bit, one municipality at a time. One canton at a time. That is a dangerous game because we may end up at the beginning. We must be careful and tell the people what our principles are and we should follow those principles. The biggest danger for the international community is that we do not follow those principles. And that is very dangerous. At the same time the young people are leaving BH, exactly because corruption is too strong and is stifling prosperity. These are two biggest dangers for BH. Corruption and emigration of the young people.
Where is the arrest of war crime suspects in that scale of problems?
Politicians have slowly changed their opinion. They did not have the support of the people in some regions. And people mostly supported those who are not anymore in BH. Also, the international community did not want to enter a new situation in which it would have to use weapons and military force. One has to consider that because people defend themselves. But the western countries did not want to support such activities, mostly because of internal policy concerns. I can understand that. But every policeman if he carries out his tasks correctly, cannot say - I'm not going there, there are criminals there and it is dangerous. In that case, there is no Police. I think that that is a wrong concept of the international community.