Yes! It is not polite to debate with the readers, especially with those who have lived abroad for a long time, as the mentioned gentleman, and who love Croatia unquestioningly, nostalgically and irrationally, as it is usually loved from a distance. Love for Croatia, however, is that damn question that we believed would become an intimate matter of every person after Tudjman's departure, instead of that shaky empty phrase used by the regime to separate the unquestionable Croats from the "suspicious" critics. It turns out, unfortunately, that a year after Tudjman's departure, only the President seems to be aware that to love Croatia means to clear up all the evils done by Tudjman's regime; precisely Mesic's persistent attempts to put an end to the stretched nationalistic forgery are one of the reasons prompting [Prime Minister] Racan to (successfully) attempt to deprive Mesic of his presidential prerogatives. All this with the alleged aim to establish democracy.
But has that model of government really been established in Croatia after Tudjman? Or is it that Ivica Racan skillfully established a chancellor's model of government? In this system the power is concentrated in the hands of the Prime Minister, while it reduces not only the positive influence of the President, but also of the Parliament, which is gradually slipping back to its role under Tudjman - that of a debating club.
In this context, those who claim that Budisa is actually not an important factor in the obstruction of democratic changes are right. A year after the elections, the whole power is in the hands of Prime Minister Racan, who even tried to proclaim Tudjman's "historical" transcripts and tapes for Government's property, and whose "experts" will then decide whether or not to give the transcripts to The Hague Tribunal.
Isn't precisely Racan's ruthless desire for power, the source of his lack of tolerance for every different opinion, the reason why Croatia still hasn't got even the most basic traits of a civic state in which citizens would join into groups to protect birds, oysters, or cacti, for example... their own individual interests which represent the realization of that empty phrase from the beginning of the text: love for Croatia.
Instead, the public space is still polluted with political projects of various groups that joined together mostly in order to save the "endangered national interests". For example, the members of the National Salvation Government from 1991 gathered recently to appeal for "unity and defense of national interests of Croatia, the foundations of which have been jeopardized by the criminalization of the Homeland War". Nine years after the crimes committed by both, Serbs and Croats, Greguric, Granic, Hebrang, Sarinic, Vekic, Tomac, Rudolf... meet to defend Croatia? From whom? From pensioners, housewives, journalists? Or to protect themselves from curious Carla del Ponte, who wants to know what the war government did in the time when Serb civilians were taken to Pakracka Poljana and killed, when Tudjman stopped the Army push towards Vukovar, where Milosevic's hordes killed hundreds of civilians in Ovcara, when a small group of volunteers defended Dubrovnik with almost no weapons, when criminals such as Oreskovic established a criminal government in Gospic, when the military police commanded by Mate Lausic maltreated and killed the "suspicious" citizens of Split in the war port Lora... And hasn't precisely Budisa, who is also a member of the National Salvation Government, revealed the true purpose of the meeting with his statement that he had nothing against the meeting of the wartime government, but that "it might be understood as a move of the people who are afraid or worried about their destinies"?
And really, when Zdravko Tomac today blabbers that every defense of the national interests is these days labeled as nationalism, and arrogant Andrija Hebrang, as if his never forgotten adopted father were still alive, shouts that by "criminalizing one government the whole country is being criminalized" (does this apply to NDH [Croat pro-Nazi WWII state] government?), it becomes clear that the sleep of Tudjman's and Susak's close associates has been disturbed. Hebrang also arrogantly attacked Zivko Juzbasic, also a member of the National Salvation Government, who said that they had been only a cover for Tudjman's and Susak's decisions (the question is why in that case Juzbasic did not resign from the government), claiming "it was a responsible and active government, the best ever in Croatia".
Hebrang, therefore, refuses to be a cover; he is an active participant in the government during whose term in office (while most of the Croats defended the country) horrendous crimes took place, the crimes that certain Carla del Ponte wants to prosecute. As an active participant, brave and fearless, and considering his role in the wartime government, Hebrang is logically responsible for lack of knowledge, or deliberate suppression of information about violations of the international wartime law and failure to prosecute criminals.
"I knew about one murder that took place in the military prison in Lora", said Davorin Rudolf. He claims he didn't know about other murders; therefore can anyone expect an honorable resignation for only one murder, moreover, of a Serb civilian. Especially from a man who did everything to continue his century-long career in diplomacy, even after the election of the new government. But, despite the arrogance of the members of the "best Croatian government ever", they are still scared. Because The Hague Court demands 131 transcripts of the conversations of the former state officials. The former Police Minister Ivan Vekic has also suddenly resurrected, and The Hague Tribunal doesn't seem to be showing any understanding for his famous statement: "History will only shrug its shoulders". The people that shrugged their shoulders over "only one murder", or a dozen of them, today claim that the demands made by the Court question the credibility of the people who fought against crimes. But only God knows how Vekic as the Police chief fought against the crimes in Pakracka Poljana, and Tomac, Sarinic and Ramljak against those committed in Gospic. The best answer to that question was given by Tudjman's eternal minister Mate Granic, who said that they did prosecute crime: one crime, the one committed against the Zec family. They really did, but it would have been better if they didn't, because the murderers were released and can never be tried for the same crime again. An accident? No, because the government was "fighting a just liberation war" (Hebrang), and even according to Hebrang crimes against the civilians were simply cases in which individuals "exceeded the necessary defense". Therefore, should we believe Juzbasic and Granic, who still babbles about how sorry he is "for not capturing Banja Luka"?
Should anyone be worried about the fact that this suspicious little group holds public meetings, and secretly shivers? Or can those shivers, and not only theirs, only strengthen the foundations of the state that according to them are in jeopardy?