Does the Wheel Come Full Circle in Former Yugoslavia?
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
Südosteuropa 59 (2011), H . 3, S . 286-300 DEFRAGMENTING YUGOSLAVIA IRENA RISTIć Rapprochement as a Paradigm Shift: Does the Wheel Come Full Circle in Former Yugoslavia? Abstract. Not only did Yugoslavia dissolve in an extremely violent way, its dissolution was accompanied by the emergence of a discourse that constructed the Yugoslav space as an artificial one . This discourse described Yugoslavia as a state that was created and led in a top-down fashion by undemocratic political elites .As a consequence, this discourse suggests, the people who lived in the Yugoslav state did not really want it . However, twenty years after the beginning of the break-up, and ten years after the end of the last military conflicts, we observe processes that indicate a new emergence of the space encompassing the territory of the former Yugoslavia . These processes are unique insofar as they have not been initiated by the political elites, but are being carried out – possibly for the first time since the end of the 19th century – from the bottom up . What is more, they are driven by the forces of profit and competitiveness . This article presents examples of these bottom-up processes to illustrate that, despite the traumatic experience of the fragmentation of Yugoslavia, people in the Yugoslav space have started to link once again . This rapprochment has neither been carried by a strong ideology nor pushed by an authoritarian state . Instead, it is based in a sense of a common culture, language, memory, and last but not least, shared expectations of potential economic profits . Irena Ristić is a research assistant at the Institute of Social Sciences in Belgrade and a PhD candidate in the History Department at the University of Regensburg . The disintegration of Yugoslavia seemed to have reached an end after Kosovo’s February 2008 declaration of independence was recognized by the world’s lead- ing states . At the same time, however, a process of rapprochement is bringing about an (un)intentional re-integration of the former Yugoslav space . On the one hand, this integration is unintentional because the actors involved are not led by an ideology or a political program . Instead, they are motivated by pragmatic (economic) interests that emerge from a common language and also a common memory . On the other hand, the process can be considered intentional because the actors are conscious of the specific reasons that cause them to target the former Yugoslav space . On account of what can only be considered an irony of history, the former Croatian president Stjepan Mesić is one of the most prominent politicians argu- Rapprochement as a Paradigm Shift 287 ing in favour of such rapprochement . In summer 2009, while he was still serving as president, Mesić gave an interview to the Serbian daily newspaper Danas in which he called directly for close cooperation between enterprises from the former Yugoslavia . He believed that there were at least three reasons for such cooperation . First, the companies in each former Yugoslav republic are too small to compete independently when it comes to bigger projects . Second, since a lot of companies from the former Yugoslavia have experience working in the Near East and Africa, they should collectively capitalize on their experience in that region . And third, Mesić argued, the name of Tito and of Yugoslavia still hold a good reputation among the former non-aligned countries . So, president Mesić rhetorically asked, why not make use of this advantage as well?1 Interest- ingly enough, these statements were uttered by the same person who in 1990, in his function as the last chairperson of the presidency of socialist Yugoslavia, stated in the Croatian parliament (Sabor): “I think that I completed my task – Yugoslavia does not exist anymore .”2 He back then articulated his belief that it was not only inevitable, but in fact desirable, that all Yugoslav republics act independently at all political levels . In February 2011, Mesić reflected on the dissolution of Yugoslavia in his keynote speech at the conference from which the contributions to this thematic issue originated . He described Yugoslavia metaphorically as a product in an imaginary political shop whose expiration date was May 4th, 1980 – the day that Tito passed away . Consequently, he argued, Yugoslavia’s demise was inevitable 3. After giving an overview on the reasons for the inevitability of Yugoslavia’s break-up, however, Mesić emphasized that the successor states and their people are interlinked by a common, century-long past . Their national economies, he continued, are complementary: “[…] we [the former Yugoslavs, I . R .] depend on each other in many ways […], and we cannot escape each other . Consequently, we must cooperate, cooperation is an imperative .”4 1 Lidija Valtner, Zajedno prema Nesvrstanima, Danas, 22 July 2009, available at <http:// www .danas .rs/vesti/politika/zajedno_prema_nesvrstanima .56 .html?news_id=167188> . All internet sources were accessed on 9 September 2011 . 2 Stjepan Mesić on 5 December 1991 in the Croatian parliament . Quoted in Zorica Stanivuković, Kako smo rušili Jugoslaviju, NIN, 3 October 2002, available at <http://www . nin .co .rs/2002-10/03/25240 .html> . Cf . the chronology at the website of the Hrvatski Informativni Centar, quoting Mesić, available at <http://www .hic .hr/domov-rat-citali02 .htm> . A video of the statement is available at <http://www .youtube .com/watch?v=9w2PMEWh6EM&NR=1> . 3 Stjepan Mesić, Zwanzig Jahre nach dem Zusammenbruch Jugoslawiens, Keynote to the conference “Rapprochement as a Paradigm Shift: Does the Wheel Come Full Circle in Former Yugoslavia?”, organized by the Südost-Institut, Regensburg, and the Südosteuropa- Gesellschaft, Munich . Regensburg, 11 February 2011, 2 (manuscript) . 4 Ibid ., 13f . 288 Irena Ristić It is not the aim of the present article to ponder the words and ideas of Stjepan Mesić . He serves only as a means of introducing this special issue of Südosteuropa, which is dedicated to “Defragmenting Yugoslavia” . The contributions to the special issue focus on the rapprochement processes among the former Yugoslav states and on present perceptions of the former Yugoslavia . In this framework, Mesić’s rhetoric of “we had to split up – we must cooperate” aptly illustrates a (mental) switch towards re-integration that is obviously taking place among many actors involved in politics, economics, culture and sports in the successor states of the former Yugoslavia . At first sight, Mesić’s statements in 2009 and 2011 seem anything but sur- prising . Considering the fact that regional cooperation and good neighbourly relations were among the EU integration requirements faced by the so-called Western Balkan countries, there seems nothing revolutionary about a call for co- operation among the former Yugoslav states . On thecontrary, such cooperation was commonplace and even en vogue, because it was in line with the wishes of Brussels, i . e . with the requests of the 2003 Thessaloniki Agenda and the 2008/09 Enlargement Strategy .5 However, Mesić’s statements have been recounted here neither to illustrate the effects of EU integration efforts, nor to illustrate regional cooperation as such . Nor is it my intention to frame Mesić’s words as an attempt at reconciliation among the successor states of Yugoslavia, or even as Yugonostalgia 6. Rather, my aim – and the aim of this special issue – is to draw the reader’s attention to processes that have started to take place without overt political intentions or ideas to back them . These processes have been kicked off by individuals and institutions from the former Yugoslavia not to satisfy Brus- sels or to fulfill a requirement for the next step of the EU integration process . 5 EU-Western Balkans Summit – Declaration, Thessaloniki, 21 June 2003 (10229/03), point n . 9, available at <http://ec .europa .eu/enlargement/enlargement_process/accession_process/ how_does_a_country_join_the_eu/sap/thessaloniki_summit_en .htm>; Thessaloniki Agenda for the Western Balkans, Annex A, point n . 5, available at <http://ec .europa .eu/enlargement/ enlargement_process/accession_process/how_does_a_country_join_the_eu/sap/thessalo- niki_agenda_en .htm>; Commission of the European Comunities, Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament, Enlargement Strategy and Main Challenges 2008-2009, COM (2008) 674 final, 5 November 2008, 10, 13, available at <http:// ec .europa .eu/enlargement/pdf/press_corner/key-documents/reports_nov_2008/strategy_pa- per_incl_country_conclu_en .pdf>; idem, Communication from the Commission to the Council and the European Parliament, Enlargement Strategy and Main Challenges 2009-2010, COM (2009) 533, 14 October 2009, 3, 6-8, available at <http://ec .europa .eu/enlargement/pdf/key_docu- ments/2009/strategy_paper_2009_en .pdf> . 6 As Svetlana Slapšak argues in her contribution to this special issue (“Twin Cultures and Rubik’s Cube Politics: The Dynamics of Cultural Production in Pro-YU, Post-YU, and Other YU Inventions”), the term Yugonostalgia is much less straightforward than it seems, given its popularity . She introduces the terms twin cultures and ground truthing in order to access the deeper roots and more complex structures of what is generally referred to as Yugonostalgia . Rapprochement as a Paradigm Shift 289 Instead, they are motivated by either a shared common history and memory7 or by a pragmatic profit interest that builds on awareness of belonging to a com- mon space 8. This issue focuses on processes that have come about without being explicated by political actors or accompanied by an overburdening ideology of collective belonging . These processes have neitherbeen enforced nor requested by external conditions or the international community . Such processes of rapprochement can be observed on a number of levels . Yet, there are levels on which they have not yet shown tangible results . Per- haps most significantly, we have not yet witnessed any crucial initiatives that encompass the Yugoslav space on the political level . This is understandable, since the complex reasons for this lack of political initiatives can be traced to the violent break-up of the 1990s .