CROATIA

Marinko Culic of the Split weekly Feral Tribune writes in the magazines issue of January 12, 1998, about the situation among the Croatian opposition and the ongoing discussion about the leader of the opposition.

A storm in a glass of water. This is how the first self - proclamation of the new leader of the opposition among the Croats could be called, and also the very inflammable discussion initiated in that respect by professor Vesna Pusic in the Zagreb weekly Globus.

Within a day or two after her interview, the complete gallery of the leaders of the opposition parties reacted, all of who rejected the idea that the opposition would need some generally accepted leader, even only a co - ordinator.

In principle, there is not much that could be objected to Pusics opponents, on the contrary, they would garner clear points, if any of them would have explained what they want, and not only what they do not want.

But, it becomes clear that Vesna Pusic has been silenced because of the leadership model she proposed, but because of the position she reserved for herself in it. This has been more or less openly said by the tow presidential candidates at the last years elections, Zdravko Tomac and Vlado Gotovac.

It is not that there are no aspirants to the leadership role in the opposition, but this nervous and hurried discussion shows that there is no mechanism that would channel towards some thought out goal. The result is that even some of the biggest stars (or stars) on the opposition scene remained completely politically unrealized, particularly if they themselves did not know what to do with their career and did not notice the real moment to capitalize it.

The opposition has only filled the last eight years with strategic waiting for something to happen, which resulted in two things: HDZ very quickly realized that it can accept the inability of the opposition to chose its leaders as a call that it should do this instead of it, and some renowned non - party people came to the same conclusion.

Still, the first move was made by Tudjmans party, and exactly at the time of dangerous Savka Dabcevic - Kucar. She was de - favored in relation to Drazen Budisa immediately after the first elections, even some time after the second elections, when she received four times less votes than he did. Budisa even admits that he was then also offered the position of uncrowned leader of the opposition, which he did not accept, and only due to professional silence, it could not be said for certain, but it could be presumed with a great certainty that this role was later connected with Josip Manolic.

Why did the choice fall exactly on these two? No matter how clear it is that Manolic and Budisa are anything but political twins, there is one point that connects them in Tudjmans eyes. Both have shared the same opinion for a brief period before the first parliamentary elections that the whole Croatian opposition could be organized into one party. Although it was soon apparent that this will come to nothing, and it was exactly Budisa who left hurriedly back to his corner - realizing that Tudjman is not initiating a party but virtual state power - the spirit of this idea is still alive today. It is exactly to it that we owe the impression which is pushing itself so vividly, that the Croatian opposition actually is not an opposition at all, but only an outer circle of the same, ruling party, which has concentrically spread across the political scene.

When such an opposition was made transparent, out of party leaders started seeping in into that scene, first of all the Croatian intellectual bard Ivan Supek, and in recent time, even a high official of the Catholic church (Josip Bozanic). How quick and forceful was that breakthrough could be seen with what advantage was Supek leading in the New years polls ahead of all the leaders of the opposition, while Bozanic, only after a few public appearances, is only behind Racan. The irony is that Supek, in his late years of life, cannot compete with leadership ambitions of any of these political leaders.

But, in spite of this, the strong profiling of these two on the political scene is in itself a resounding criticism of this opposition and the state it is in. The opposition Suppek openly ridicules, calling it to place its fabricated ideological controversies as feather in their hat and finally do something for this country.


Source: Split weekly Feral Tribune, January 12, 1998