Strange beginnings: Mladen Ivanic belongs to the segment of Serb politicians who are considered to be modern and cooperative - and lastly, popular. And then everything changed overnight. As soon as he was appointed prime-minister designate, Ivanic found himself caught between two fires. On one side, the SDS, a nationalist party, the winner [in the elections], with a bad reputation among the international community, seeking to buy a future for itself by taking a step backward; on the other, the international community (first and foremost, the Americans) which has been waiting for six years in BH for the people to acknowledge its will, no matter how diametrically opposed it is to the will of the people as expressed in elections. With whom was it harder to reach an agreement, we asked the new premier.
IVANIC: I haven't satisfied anyone completely. I was aware that there is no ideal solution and that compromise is possible. I believed that the SDS must be present [in the government] because of basic respect for democratic principles. This party has 31 representatives in the parliament of the necessary 42 [for a parliamentary majority]. I believed that the period of three years during which the will of the people was not respected and the government did not have a clear majority needed to come to an end. The problem is the symbolism. International institutions, especially the U.S., do not want the SDS in the government. Any representative of the SDS! If the choice is between the support of international institutions and the democratic will of the people, if everything is reduced to this dilemma, I truly think that the will of the people is the greater value. The greatest value, actually.
NIN: What did the SDS want?
At first, they wanted far greater presence. However, they have become much more realistic. I believe that the representation of the SDS by one man who belongs to a very liberal structure, who is acknowledged as an expert in his field, is a realistic measure under the present circumstances.
Opponents are finding more people from the SDS in the government?
Of course. If we look at it that way, all 20 ministers could be from the SDS. But that is a product of manipulation and scheming.
How far does American pressure extend?
It is said that the U.S. will withdraw from all programs in RS and exercise its influence to secure a blockade by international financial institutions.
Is there are difference between the European and the American approach?
The European countries have demonstrated far greater tolerance. They are not happy with the presence of the SDS themselves but as the majority of European countries has a similar parliamentary system, they understand what a parliamentary majority means and they understand the problems with which I am confronted.
But isn't it common knowledge that the SDS has undergone a significant transformation?
For some of the international institutions, it is still Karadzic's party. This position is the result of certain frustrations from the war, which I can partially comprehend. But they are still interpreting conditions in RS and BH from the standpoint of the war enemy even though we are now in the year 2001. A great many people from the war are no longer in the Republic of Srpska. We have a new generation of politicians on the scene here and I believe that this has not been adequately accepted. On the other hand, we finally have an admission that nationalism exists among the other two peoples [in BH] as well. If there is anything positive to be said at all for all this pressure, it is that for the first time the Croatian Democratic Alliance (HDZ), the [Muslim] Party of Democratic Action (SDA) and the SDS are being treated equally.
Is this a good line of demarcation, though?
It is unrealistic and cynical to claim that people who were generals during the war, Sefer Halilovic, for example, who is today a member of the Alliance for Changes, represent the democratic future of Bosnia-Hercegovina, while some people in the SDA, the HDZ and the SDS who weren't even members of those parties during the war represent the past.
Why doesn't your government have a minister of defense yet?
That position requires a great number of consultations due to the direct influence which SFOR and other institutions have in that area. I have not had time to consult either with our General Staff or with those institutions and that is why I decided to temporarily delay this decision. It will not last long, a week or two. It is certain that the position will be held by a civilian.
What do consultations on a minister look like in this country?
Consultations on a police minister [minister of internal affairs] are basically held because of the strong presence of the IPTF and some other institutions; on a finance minister because of international financial institutions which want to know who they are dealing with; and minimally, on a justice minister. The other ministers are not subjects of consultation with representatives of international institutions.
It's as if the international community, in opposing the nationalist parties, is actually fueling nationalism?
During the past three years the tactic of the international community has been to ignore the results of the elections, especially in RS. The elections of 1998 were never implemented; we never got a government in accordance with the election results. The situation in which we are today demonstrates the catastrophic results of this policy. I believe that this policy must not be followed any more. I will never allow myself to head a government that does not have a stable majority. When you lack legitimacy, you cannot do anything.
The departure of Biljana Plavsic to The Hague reminds us of other problems with the international community which await you. The previous government promised that it would pass a law on cooperation with the Tribunal; however, that has been left up to this government.
The cooperation which Yugoslavia establishes with The Hague will help us, too, and define the basic terms which we will adopt as well. Yugoslavia has greater political freedom and the ability to establish standards that will also be acceptable to RS. I expect that after establishing relations we will share the experiences of Yugoslavia which is much further along in the process of cooperation with the Hague Tribunal than we are.
Is Kostunica's idea to try the accused in their own country realistic?
There will be probllems with it but the political strength of Yugoslavia and the new leadership is great; international institutions will not be able to simply ignore it. It would be very helpful to those of us who are here if the Hague Tribunal took a clearer position with respect to the wartime leaders of the Bosniaks and the Croats. I cannot believe that not one of the key leaders of either of those peoples is on their list whereas all the political figures from the Republic of Srpska are on it. This carries some elements of collective responsibility. It is an attempt to condemn.
Before the RS elections, Kostunica received you, Sarovic and Cavic. Are Belgrade and Banja Luka getting complementary political teams which will be able to establish normal, essential cooperation?
I have always sought to leave the partisan aspect of cooperation aside and claimed that it is in the interest of the people, that is, of one and the same people on both sides of the river, to cooperate. Now I personally know some of the people from the new government and sincerely believe that various agreements will be easier to achieve. Both Yugoslavia and those of us who are here are keeping in mind the fact that Bosnia-Hercegovina is a country. This is accepted by everyone: President Kostunica, Mr. Djindjic and all the key political figures. And I believe that we will reach agreements on everything more quickly and easily now.
How will the international community view this cooperation?
One would think that it would be in the interests of the international community to have a stable Republic of Srpska. One would think that it would be in its interests to have an increase in the level of economic activity and a stabilization of political conditions. One would think that it would be in its interest to have RS cooperating with a regime that is considered to be democratic.
Apparently the politicians from Sarajevo do not agree with you?
That is a sign that the Sarajevo political establishment has not yet comprehended that circumstances in the region have changed. After Mr. Kostunica's visit to Sarajevo, the situation will gradually change. The problem is that a part of the political establishment in Sarajevo built its position on the victimhood theory in the belief that this would get it the support of international institutions, both financial and political. In the new circumstances this theory is old, an anachronism.
Will the special relations between FRY and RS finally materialize and what exactly will they encompass?
One needs to be realistic and establish connections in areas where that is possible. The only issue which may be contested is that of dual citizenship. But we really care about dual citizenship and I believe that we have a right to it. This document should enable true cooperation between one and the same people in the areas of culture, education, in areas tied to tradition and especially in the area of economics. My contacts with the international community suggest that this is not going to be something that is hotly contested.
A politically-motivated, forcible interruption of economic relations has brought great damage to both sides. Is restoring those relations a priority?
It is the top priority! This is the easiest way to raise the level of economic activity in the Republic of Srpska and I would say in Yugoslavia as well. Before the interruption we imported various goods from Yugoslavia worth almost 800 million marks; we exported more than 400 million marks. In conversations with colleagues in the Yugoslav government and the future Serbian government, I gained the impression that this is in their interests also and that as soon as the government in Yugoslavia in consolidated, we will sit down and resolve several issues in very concrete terms: customs, procedures, papers to simplify trade.
What kind of economic situation have you inherited?
Well, the unemployment rate is about 40 percent and continues to rise. We inherited a situation in which there are almost no direct foreign investments. So much for the stories about the great support of international institutions. Privatization should have been finished six months ago and is now just getting started. The pensioners are asking the government to pay them 120 million marks in arrears for unpaid pensions in 1999 and 2000. The government owes more than 280 million to state-funded organizations. This may not seem like a lot but the entire budget is 860 million. We have a tremendous trade deficit. The deficit in various industries totals more than one billion marks. Two thirds of what we import are consumable goods; less than ten percent is equipment. We import to consume; we don't export to finance new enterprises.
Based on my information, income has fallen from 3 million a day to 500,000 during this period. At the same time, old debts incurred before 1992 have risen from 1.2 billion to almost 1.8 billion. Without any concrete results in the economy. The money has been spent - for goods. We are in debt without having achieved anything.
It seems that there is no light at the end of the tunnel?
If one looks at all these things together then the job of the RS Prime Minister is probably one of the most difficult jobs one can imagine. However, reforms must be initiated and changes must be initiated. And we know what we need to do.
What?
First of all, to get involved where the state can wield direct influence by its decisions. First, an increase in tax collection. This also means standing up to corruption. This is critical. We plan to form a special anti-corruption team with the task of reviewing all the laws, establishing where the loopholes are and eliminating those shortcomings. This team should propose the passing of a separate law to speed up court decisions in cases involving public officials. We must establish control over all financial institutions that collect revenue. There must be internal controls in customs, in the financial police, in administration of public income. This is the area where we can achieve the quickest and biggest effects because everything depends directly on us.
When do you expect results?
Things will not get better overnight. However, I am certain that within a period of six months these measures will yield results. We will fight vehemently against illegal employment. We estimate that we lose 300 million marks per year on it. We lose 1 million marks on failure to pay contributions for people working illegally in private companies. If we put this money together with what we are already collecting, we wouldn't have any problems with paying pensions, health care and education at decent rates for local conditions.
How will you address the issue of accountability?
I've told the ministers that they will have complete freedom to implement policies and conduct business. If there are problems, I will not hesitate to replace a minister even at the price of losing the political support of the parliament.
Will the responsibility of the previous government be investigated?
Everyone's actions will be investigated in accordance with the law, without political revenge, on the basis of evidence. I have no intention of creating scandals; on the other hand, I have no intention of preventing scandals from being investigated as I know other politicians have done in the past.
Many political parties have won in elections by promising large foreign investments. The results have been catastrophic. Do you expect a change?
The changes in Yugoslavia have created conditions for the influx of foreign capital. The Yugoslav market may be larger but the rest of them are quite small and not one serious investor will go there. However, if all these markets were to join together, if trade were simplified and especially if an agreement was achieved of the type that Turkey has with the European Union, a sort of duty-free trade, then this area would be quite interesting for investors. Many believe that Yugoslavia and Croatia will draw investors and that we will be forgotten. I believe that the northern part of the Republic of Srpska is an ideal area: close to the Sava River, close to major roads, close to railways. And we have quite a bit of experience in economic cooperation with Croatia, Sarajevo and Belgrade. It will not be easy for Belgrade to do business with Zagreb for a long time to come. We are already in that position.
Where are you expecting a solution to come from? From the Stability Pact or some regional initiative?
The region is still frustrated. A part of the region is still living in fear of the creation of a new Yugoslavia. These are political stupidities but the frustrations exist. It will take more time but the only true solution is for initiatives to come from the region. The Stability Pact can impose something, contribute something but it cannot solve the problem. The problem can be solved only if the initiative comes from the region.