Instead of a Large Coalition, the Sixsome Becomes a Fivesome

Aim, Zagreb, June 4, 2001

The Archbishop of Zagreb, Josip Bozanic, whose bold comments of the most topical political events have been attracting the public attention for years, remained true to his reputation. At the recent celebration of the National Day this May 30, he delivered a noted speech, as part of the mass for homeland, which was attended by the entire top state leadership (head of state Mesic, Prime Minister Racan, President of Parliament Tomcic and even the first man of the Croatian Army, General Stipetic).

Naturally, aware who would be among the audience, Bozanic prepared a speech seasoning it with a number of complaints against the current authorities, some of which (typically for him) in the past had met with the response of the public. He said that the authorities must not be above the people, but serve them as otherwise the state would get off the course. This is not the first time that the Archbishop of Zagreb reproached the authorities for being self-absorbed and only concerned with the positions they got hold of, while survival and other problems of the country were being left unresolved and were growing.

However, he now placed those objections in the context of discord in the country clearly hinting at the authorities' inability to get together all political and other factors of rather small Croatia who could help the country get out of crisis. In a sense, this could be understood as a plea for finding a way after local elections (which brought certain success to parties of the Right, headed by the HDZ) to reflect that political segment in state authorities (at that moment the TV cameras zoomed in on Racan's worried face, which was actually a routine facial gymnastics, because the ensuing events showed that the Prime Minister was not in the least surprised by these words, but that they quite nicely fitted into his intentions).

However, Bozanic did not stop at that, but addressed his objections to the other side too. He spoke about undiminished nationalism and contrasted it with "healthy patriotism" which he defined as one which doesn't end in extremes like "xenophobia" or "abstract cosmopolitanism". Again, the Archbishop did not state precisely who he was referring to, but in all likelihood his targets were radical parties and associations of the Right from which the Kaptol (presidential palace) has already discreetly distanced itself in connection with certain mass demonstrations organised in recent months. Apart from that, this could sound as a cautious opening of a discussion on the state in the Church itself, where nationalism is still very much present ad undoubtedly gave an important contribution to the rise of the Right at the recent elections.

Bozanic doesn't belong to the nationalistic church centre and would most probably want to see the Church distance itself from the epicentre of populist developments which have marked the recent months (there are purely inter-church reasons for this, for the coming of the Right into full swing coincides and, in all likelihood, interweaves with shocks in the church hierarchy, like in the case of the fake bishop Franja Srecko in Herzegovina). But, if he were not a part of that mainstream, the Zagreb Metropolitan would not have the courage to oppose it more openly. This should explain that part of his message to the Croatian top leadership on lethal divisions that are, allegedly, tearing Croatia apart. Although he did not state precisely what he had in mind, it was easy to guess.

This refers to the seeming schism between the "red" and "black" Croatia, which was allegedly caused by the current authorities, which turned Croatia to the left and betrayed Tudjman's idea on reconciliation. In this Bozanic relied on the increasingly present platitude (coming from the parties of the Right which consciously twist the basic facts). There is practically no organised Left in Croatia, but on the other hand, behind these redophobic alarms an expressly nationalistic movement, which rallies a number of parliamentary and non-parliamentary factors, including a significant part of the Church, has been building up for months.

And that movement is only conditionally right-oriented (in any case, much more than Racan's Social-Democrats are left-oriented) because these are destructive groups which openly incite to the toppling of authorities, which, in turn, defines them much better than conservative political stands they advocate. As we have mentioned, Bozanic is not a supporter of their conservative convictions, but by all appearances the outcome of recent local elections made him adequately adjust his rhetoric and direct the feelings these elections had brought to surface towards the church. However, he was not alone in this.

Immediately after the elections, both Racan and part of the ruling sextet started flirting with such feelings. That was evident when the sixsome for the first time agreed to officially form a coalition with the HDZ in four out of twenty-one districts, and especially when the decision of Racan's Government to put up a Homeland Monument, was made public. That idea is still boiling in the ideological pots of the ruling coalition leaders – only difference being that the original idea was to erect a monument to the "Homeland War" - but when it surfaced it flabbergasted the nation same as Tudjman's reconciliatory rhetoric once did.

Let us remind: Tudjman marched onto the Croatian political scene mostly thanks to the idea on reconciling the Ustashas and Partisans, which served as an argument on the front just as long as it took him to climb to power and win the war which was already hanging in the air and which he, from his view, could expect with certainty. However, it was essentially rightist-nationalistically intoned because, for the first time it publicly rehabilitated that part of the Croatian political spectrum that was denied legitimacy both at home and abroad.

Both these components were included in the idea on the Homeland Monument. Racan explained it with the imperative "to put a stop to schisms in the ethnos" and bring back the togetherness from the "Homeland War" in which there were "no leftists, no rightists, and all political, social, cultural and other differences were pushed aside". This Racan's evident courting to national sentiments of Croat men and women had an instantaneous effect, but from quite the opposite side of the political spectrum than the expected one. Obviously feeling threatened by this sudden outburst of patriotism in the top ranks of authorities, HDZ resolutely opposed the idea on a coalition in four districts in which it fared so well that it can rule on its own. The idea on the Homeland Monument has been discarded under a rather logical explanation that Tudjman has already raised such a monument (The Altar of Homeland) so that it was not necessary to waste any money on its replica.

However, it seems that Racan's word were taken very seriously by the Istrian Democratic Alliance (IDS), which decided to withdraw from the ruling sixsome. It is now quite certain that this first major rift in the ruling coalition is leading to the new re-shuffling of cards on the Croatian political scene, i.e. calling of extraordinary parliamentary elections. It is quite possible that, among other things, this is why the IDS has withdrawn from the ruling coalition - so that it could develop the clearest possible ideological situation for the new measuring of swords.

Namely, their explanation for withdrawing from the coalition states that they have been accused that by their pronounced regional stands they have helped the Right to return to the scene while the real truth is, they say, that the IDS doesn't need the Right one little bit. The Right has all the helpers it needs in the very top ranks of the Croatian state authorities.

Marinko Culic

(AIM)