used without permission, for "fair use" only

Tudman Isn't King Anymore

by Ibrahim Prohic

Oslobodenje, Sarajevo, Bosnia-Hercegovina, June 9 1998

Dr. Franjo Tudman remains the "president of all Croats", but he isn't a king any more, HDZ remains united (in Croatia and Bosnia-Hercegovina) but only on paper, while a political and social system based on the concept of national and political movement is maintained on only one foundation - its leader. People who make up HDZ in Bosnia-Hercegovina, unfortunately, do not have necessary decisiveness, courage and autonomy, and posses even less political capacity for anticipation of history and authentic vision. Of course, there are enough arguments for the above offered claims, but after the reconciliation between Jelavic and Zubak under the auspices of the leader in Zagreb such claims are very obvious. In this situation, it is necessary to define and strengthen a Croatian alternative to HDZ in Bosnia-Hercegovina. That is equally in the interest of Bosnian Croats and Bosnian state. It remains uncertain what such alternative can do before the September elections.

Shaken Authority of the Leader

Vlado Gotovac, president of the Liberal Party in Croatia, stated that at the fifth congress of HDZ in Mostar, the authority of the leader had been shaken. If Tudman's authority of a charismatic leader fails among the Croats in Bosnia, or is significantly diminished, that would affect the developments in Croatia as well. Because of that, believes Gotovac, Tudman had to patch up a crack which appeared in Mostar and threatens to bring to the surface dramatic tensions which sooner or later appear in all political movements between different parts of the movement.

After the congress in Mostar it remains unclear whether the election of the new HDZ president in Bosnia-Hercegovina was an act of disobedience with respect to Tudman, and if it was, whether it had been expected, or whether it was a calculated move that the dissident party led by Zubak should gather the votes of Croats in the Bosnian Sava river valley and central Bosnia and thus thwart Croatian alternative in Bosnia (Komsic, Simic, Brkic). The answer to the controversy from Mostar is not crucial for the analysis of the status of Tudman as a leader of a movement. The fact that the act of disobedience with respect to the leader has occurred, whether real or fake, is not decisive. Regardless of the form and credibility of the disobedience, that fact has brought into question the credibility of the leader. Maybe it is too early to say that Tudman is a leader in decline, but he cannot anymore count on having unquestionable authority, although his charisma still exists. The followers have begun to doubt, says Gotovac, and believe to have the right to say - no! Once obtained, the right to defiance can be extremely dangerous for charisma and absolutism. Later vows of loyalty to the leader which arrived from both camps (Both Jelavic's and Zubak's) haven't removed this danger.

The speed with which Tudman organized the meeting in Zagreb and postponement of some state obligations reveals the fear, maybe even panic in Zagreb. In the official statement the result of the meeting was described as compromise, therefore not as the reconciliation of two wings. Even that compromise was more a consequence of pressure from Tudman than a true compromise of two factions in Bosnian HDZ. It can be concluded from some later Zubak's actions that the idea about the founding of a new HDZ is still alive. A day after the Zagreb meeting, Zubak was present at the round table organized by "Napredak" in Kiseljak where it could be heard that this ethnic cultural organization ["Napredak"] must be fully depoliticized, and that it should primarily work on the survival of Croats in Bosnia-Hercegovina. The openness of "Napredak" to other nations is explicit "because, simply, we here live in a multi-ethnic society".

Split In "Provinces"

If the above analysis is correct than we must conclude that in the clash within HDZ in Bosnia-Hercegovina the status of Jelavic, Zubak or someone else is not important in comparison with the authority of the top leader and his unquestioned right to make decisions about "the interests of the Croatian people". The future of the whole system built in the territory of Bosnia-Hercegovina and Croatia under Tudman's leadership in the last seven years has been brought into question. Why is a political split in the "provinces" which are legally a part of another state (Bosnia-Hercegovina) dangerous not only for the leader but also the system as a whole? Because the system is undoubtedly an authoritarian system based on feudal principles of blood relations (cousins, godfathers and cronies), a system in which classical state institutions are subservient to the interests of the oligarchy and leader's will.

The power of the leader is a dominant principle and criterion which determines and organizes all levels and segments of the society, both horizontally and vertically. Totalitarian social models, because of lack of autonomy of their constituent parts must expand or perish. An illness of the death of one part threatens to bring about the collapse of the whole system. Consequently, in the model developed by the Tudman's regime in Croatia and a part of Bosnia-Hercegovina there is no place for integral and independent Bosnia-Hercegovina. The essence of that relationship and problem is revealed, unconsciously, by Zubak with the name for his new party: Bosnian-Hercegovinian HDZ as an alternative to HDZ of Bosnia-Hercegovina. These are not linguistic details but a significantly strategically different concept. Unfortunately, stool pigeon politicians like Zubak do not have a potential for a historical turnaround.

However, the fact that the split was welded in Zagreb and that it was published that there would be single HDZ in Bosnia doesn't also mean that HDZ will be united. The conflict in HDZ which manifested itself on the 5th congress as a clash of personalities has deeper roots. HDZ is based on a spent idea in significantly changed international situation and different balance of power (both in Croatia and Bosnia-Hercegovina). In Zagreb, Tudman removed a consequence, but the causes are still there.

Translated on 7/20/98