MEETING BEHIND CLOSED DOORS

Pre-Election Political Games

AIM Sarajevo, September 7, 1996 - In compliance with its former conclusions, the Assembly of the Republic of Bosnia & Herzegovina, at its session convened to be held on September 11 in Sarajevo, before the forthcoming elections, is expected to reconsider once again conditions for their taking place and accordingly give a recommendation to the voters about coming to the polls.

Although all the necessary conditions for democratic and fair elections in B&H have not been fuffilled, nor could be fulfilled for a long time to come, it is hardly possible to believe that anything could be changed concerning the date of the elections - September 14. In other words, little time was left for it, and the international community has manifested hardly any willingness for their possible postponement.

The political recommendation of the parliamentarians to the voters of B&H could therefore ultimately be to boycott the elections. To what extent this possibility is realistic and how much its most zealous supporters - Party of Democratic Action (SDA), Party for B&H and the Patriotic Party - can count on it, was shown by the unexpectedly convened consultative meeting of the Chairman of the Assembly of R B&H Miro Lazovic with presidents of political parties. The meeting was convened, as it was explained in the letter of invitation, because of the seriousness of the political timing and the decisive significance of the elections for the future of B&H. The seriousness of the timing and the significance of the meeting is also illustrated by the fact that it was held behind carefully and firmly closed doors, and the public was informed by a bleak statement which contains the observation of its participants, representatives of 11 political parties, that conditions for the elections have not been fulfilled. The stance about possible boycott of the elections, were not even mentioned in the statement for the public, although this had been essentially the immediate cause for convening of this meeting. Even the first man of the SDA, Alija Izetbegovic, according to unofficial information, advocated the stance that the elections should take place when scheduled.

What is the background of all this and what was expected to be formed as a political recommendation to the voters which would then be adopted by the parliament at its next session? Was SDA just feeling the political pulse in order to win support of political parties in the parliament in case they insisted to boycott the elections, or was it just the last attempt to let the international public know something that is so obvious - that the conditions for the elections have not been fulfilled?

Judging by the stances of the opposition parties, the most resolute and the most vociferous ones - the Social Democratic Party (SDP), the Union of B&H Social Democrats (UBSD), the Liberal Bosniac Organization (LBO) and others who are in favour of holding the elections as planned - the consultative parliamentary meeting was in fact convened by the SDA. For the Vice-President of the UBSD, Sejfudin Tokic, this is understandable in view of the fact that no election result could restore the equivalence between the state and the SDA, which was mostly established on the basis of usurpation. "Like other ruling national parties (meaning the HDZ and the SDS), the SDA is afraid that a real system will finally be established, which is inevitable after September 14", says Tokic.

If all this is true and if the opposition refuses to support the SDA in its possible insisting on the intention to boycott the elections, the question which imposes itself is what and to what extent the SDA can in this respect expect from its partner in power - the HDZ?

Starting from the so far publicly proclaimed stance of the HDZ that the Croat people was in favour of the elections on all levels, the SDA needs support of all the other parliamentary parties for adoption of the recommendation to the voters to boycott the elections. However, a political compromise and a possibility that the HDZ might make a certain shift in its stance are not only possible, but there are even certain implications that it will actually occur.

That this is true is shown by the fact that leaders of the HDZ of the city of Sarajevo, at the same time the mentioned copnsulting meeting at the Assembly of RB&H took place, however from a different platform, sent word that if the status of the capital of the Federation was not resolved until the elections, they would call the voters to boycott them. Whether this is a discreet sign of a possible coalition of federal partners concerning this issue, with a certain compromise of course, it is difficult to claim. However, one thing is evident, that this is a matter of pre-election political games for winning voters over, but also of settling accounts between the federal partners.

And while games about scheduling elections are going on on the political scene, as well as about their possible boycott, a very important and essential fact is pushed aside. And that is the fact that even if all the parliamentary parties supported the boycott, and even if that were the political recommendation to be issued to the voters from the republican Parliament, it would have no effect. Especially since for anything of the kind to happen, according to Tokic's words, it would be necessary to change the Dayton accords.

To what extent this is possible and whether at all is an open question.

M. MICEVSKA