In the past, Serbia has rarely took care of itself as a country, a lot more attention was paid to the historic mission of Piedmont which should bring together the entire Serbian nation. In case of such a great mission, the internal affairs always get postponed and priority is given to a great victory which in most cases does not happen at all, says Vojin Dimitrijevic for the portal of Novi Magazin.
Is that one of the reasons why Serbia is again facing the divisions between the supporters of East and West?
The opinion about Kosovo is actually the remaining obsession for territories in which people are not taken into account. Hardly anyone is wondering what will happen to Albanians if Serbia regains Kosovo. And when you are dealing with obsession, everyone who is believed to help your dream come true becomes a good guy. That is a perfect opportunity for Russia to stand out, given the traditional sentimental ties, such as Orthodoxy and Slavdom. All this is based on the understanding of international politics as the relationship between living people, men and women, further and close relatives. Such relationships are not rational, but these views persist despite the opposite experiences.
To what extent does this affect the heritage?
Yes, it is a heritage that dates from the 19th century. Throughout history, both democracy and democratic principles in Serbia had been neglected, and it was not possible to develop an elite that would carry out such principles. It is a paradox that the greatest advances in this respect were achieved after defeats. The best example is the lost war against Bulgaria, led by King Milan. This war is completely forgotten now and all that remained of it is just a famous short story of a Serbian writer Laza Lazarevic. Students who are reading this story today in most cases do not even know which war it refers to. After that war the state became more resolute, invested in the education of talented people and their studies abroad. However, other wars happened soon after that.
Was Serbia approaching Europe in that period or was it moving away from it?
Between the 19th century and the First World War Serbia fluctuated between two great powers, Russia and Austria-Hungary. Russia somehow embodied Orthodoxy and East, and Austro-Hungary symbolized West and Catholicism. Neither of the two were democratic countries or countries whose constitutions were familiar with human rights.
Serbia never succeeded in becoming a Central European country, such as the Czech Republic and Slovakia. Moreover, there is still a tendency to laugh at the Central European mentality because it is not based on violence. Evidence for this could be found in the conversations between two writers Dobrica Cosic and Radovan Karadzic (one of which is in The Hague on trial for war crimes). They laughed at Central Europe and its culture which lacks the mentality of warriors, and therefore has no “force”.
The above-mentioned fluctuation was not an inclination towards a certain political role model. It was a purely tactical act linked to foreign policy, so it imposed Manichaean support to either East or West, to Orthodoxy or Catholicism. Since there was a constant need for a protector and ally of the foreign policy goals, ideological and civilization role models were gone. It is a shame because they were present at the time of the First Serbian Uprising when role models were sought in the French Revolution, and even before that in case of Dositej Obradovic and when these models where sought in the Age of Enlightenment.
And what about twentieth century?
The Kingdom of Yugoslavia had the same tradition where even the choice of pro or against Hitler was not ideological but state issue, so it was possible to see the extreme Nazis and Fascists among intellectuals. After the Second World War it seemed that key dilemmas were between capitalism and socialism, but they were also defined as supporting either Russia or the West. This is evident in the fact that many former Stalinists easily became Serbian nationalists, even though they should be unfamiliar with nationalism according to the Marxist teachings.
Is it possible to define a rational strategy today and in which way?
The word rationality is probably the key to finding a new policy. We should bear in mind that the EU is not West because its members are from all over Europe, and there are Slavic and Orthodox countries among them. The European Union cannot be compared with Russia because Russia, although formally a federation, is an independent state. Even Russian Prime Minister Putin knows this as he stands for Eurasian integration. This commitment has only further encouraged people in Serbia to opt for Europe or Asia, which is really strange choice.
Serbia has to finally start thinking about itself, about the country that has remained after various turmoils, and to organize that state for the people who live in it. This process would not be affected by its membership in the European Union as it does not require renunciation of the sovereignty or culture. The way in which EU takes into account the preservation of national cultures can be seen from its budget whose one third is allocated for translation into the languages of all member states. Unlike other international organizations, such as the UN, the meetings of the Union are not conducted in only two or three official languages. The languages of all member states are in use and the membership of Serbia in the European Union would add Serbian language to this group.