DEMOCRACY AND SECURITY in Southeastern Europe, No 1

18
in se rvi ce of the ci ti ze ns, de ce ntra li zed and de po li ti ci -
zed, we ll-co ordi na ted, wi th bro ad tru st and su ppo rt.” 7
In the Po li ti cal Age nda of the SNSD, acce ssi on to NA -
TO is ne ver me nti oned as a po li ti cal go al and the wo rd
NA TO do es not exi st in the ir po li ti cal pro gram. SNSD
de fi nes and ela bo ra tes mo re co ncre te ly on Bi H’s acce -
ssi on to NA TO in its pa rty de cla ra ti on under the ti tle
Pro po sal for co nsi de ra ti on of gra du al de mi li ta ri za ti on of
BiH as a co ndi ti on to pe rma ne nt pe ace, ado pted at the
Se co nd Co ngress of the Uni on of Inde pe nde nt So ci al
De mo cra ts, he ld in Ba nja Lu ka on Ju ne 28 th 2003. In this
de cla ra ti on it is sta ted: “The re fo re we pro po se that:
BiH, Se rbia, Mo nte ne gro and the Re pu blic of Cro atia
sta rt si mu lta ne ous acti vi ti es that le ad to the acco mpli -
shme nt of the NA TO pro gram ca lled the Pa rtne rship for
Pe ace. The se acti vi ti es wo uld le ad to BiH me mbe rship
in PfP, that is, to the NA TO po li ti cal wi ng. The acti vi ti es
in Se rbia, Mo nte ne gro and the Re pu blic of Cro atia sho -
uld go be fo re the acti vi ti es in BiH, and wo uld le ad the -
se two co untri es to a co mple te and fu ll me mbe rship in
NA TO. Me mbe rship only in PfP, as oppo sed to fu ll me -
mbe rship, co uld be re qu ested for BiH, ha vi ng in mi nd
all of its spe ci fi ci ti es.” 8 From this sho rt ove rvi ew it is no -
ta ble that the po li ti cal sta nce of SNSD to wa rds BiH acce -
ssi on to NA TO evo lved wi th ti me, fi rst from a
acqu ie sce nce to me mbe rship only in the PfP pro gram,
to advo ca ti ng fu ll me mbe rship in la ter po li ti cal do cu me -
nts and Asse mbly de ci si ons. The re fo re, we can see this
as a ta ctic that de pe nded on po li ti cal co nju nctu re in the
co untry, se cu ri ty cha lle nges and eve nts in the re gi on, as
we ll as the cha nges on the glo bal plan. The Se rb De mo -
cra tic Pa rty, for a whi le the mo st influ enti al, and now
the se co nd mo st po we rful pa rty in Re pu bli ka Srpska,
also has no spe ci fic po si ti on in its pa rty pro gram abo ut
the BiH acce ssi on to NA TO. But fe atu res ma ny pa rty
sta te me nts and pu blic anno unce me nts on the issue on
its offi ci al we bsi te. It can be cle arly se en, pu blic anno -
unce me nts such as “SNSD as NA TO-pa rty”, “Li es of
NA TO Co rpo ral Pe ri ca Ra j~e vi }”, “Se rbia do es not co -
nsi der jo ini ng NA TO”, “Re fe re ndum on jo ini ng NA TO”,
“SNSD aga inst NA TO re fe re ndum and ta ki ng away of
the sto len pro pe rty” etc., that this pa rty do es not re ga -
rd this impo rta nt, stra te gi ca lly po li ti cal se cu ri ty qu esti -
on, as a sta te qu esti on, but ra ther as an issue of da ily
po li ti cs used to anta go ni ze the ir po li ti cal oppo ne nts. The
co nte nts of the press re le ases re ga rdi ng NA TO show
that the SDS uses this qu esti on as pa rt of a pre-ele cti on
ca mpa ign, wi th the go al of mi ni mi zi ng the ir fo rmer su -
ppo rt to Bi H’s NA TO acce ssi on, di scre di ti ng ri val SNSD
and its po li ti cs, tyi ng this qu esti on to the offi ci al po si ti -
on of Se rbia, co ndi ti oni ng the de ci si on abo ut me mbe -
rship to a re fe re ndum and pre pa ri ng the pu blic for an
open re je cti on of a mo ve to wa rds acce ssi on. Now, pu -
tti ng asi de that it is not po ssi ble to de ci de on Bi H’s acce -
ssi on to NA TO in an enti ty re fe re ndum, hypo the ti ca lly
spe aki ng, if such a re fe re ndum we re to be he ld in the
RS, then the SDS wo uld ha ve to pu bli cly ca mpa ign for
me mbe rship, as it is obli ged to do so by the de ci si on of
the Na ti onal Asse mbly of the RS for which they the mse -
lves vo ted, or pu bli cly co nfess that they cha nged the ir
mi nd and gi ven up on that po si ti on. The Pa rty of De -
mo cra tic Pro gress has su ppo rted the co mmi tme nt to
NA TO me mbe rship in the Na ti onal Asse mbly of RS, altho
ugh in the ir pa rty do cu me nts they do not ha ve a pre -
ci se and de te rmi ned po si ti on, nor do they re fer to the
issue in da ily po li ti cal di scu ssi ons. The Se rb Ra di cal Pa -
rty has a si mi lar sta nd on this ma tter as the SDS, de ci -
si ve ly aski ng the ci ti ze ns of RS to express the ir opi ni on
on BiH jo ini ng NA TO. The De mo cra tic Pe ople ’s Uni on
and the So ci ali st Pa rty, the co ali ti on pa rtne rs of SNSD,
are li ke ly to su ppo rt the po li ti cal sta nce of the stro nge -
st me mber of the co ali ti on re ga rdi ng this qu esti on.
The re are no ta ble di ffe re nces and opi ni ons on the issue
of BiH me mbe rship in NA TO amo ng ci vil so ci ety in Re -
pu bli ka Srpska as we ll. Bi H’s me mbe rship in NA TO is
ope nly and mo st lo udly oppo sed by the NGO Se rb Pe -
ople ’s Mo ve me nt “Izbor je na {”, the Stu de nt Uni on of
Re pu bli ka Srpska, the Stu de nt Pa rli ame nt of the Uni ve -
rsi ty in Ba nja Lu ka, etc. On the other si de of the spe -
cter, orga ni za ti ons that su ppo rt de mo cra tic di scu ssi on
and di alo gue on this ma tter are amo ng othe rs the Inte -
rna ti onal Re la ti ons Ce nter, info rmal gro ups and indi vi -
du als who to ok pa rt in pu blic di scu ssi ons on se cu ri ty in
the “Fri edrich Ebe rt” fo unda ti on.
In la te 2008, upon a re qu est of the Wo rki ng Gro up of
the Co uncil of Mi ni ste rs, the Sa ra je vo age ncy “Pri zma
re se arch” co ndu cted a po ll on ci ti ze ns’ opi ni ons on BiH
jo ini ng NA TO, re ve ali ng that aro und 70% thi nk that they
are insu ffi ci ently info rmed or not info rmed at all abo ut
the pro cess of Bi H’s acce ssi on to NA TO me mbe rship.
Mo re than 56% of pe ople su rve yed are in fa vor of a re -
fe re ndum on NA TO me mbe rship, whi le that nu mber cli -
mbs to 89% in the RS. A po ll co ndu cted by NA TO in
mid-2009 sho wed that 75% of Se rbs from the RS do not
wa nt BiH to jo in NA TO. Acco rdi ng to the re se arch co -
ndu cted by age ncy “Pri me Co mmu ni ca ti ons” at the end
of la st ye ar, a li ttle over ha lf of the inha bi ta nts of Ba nja
Lu ka (55%) is aga inst the idea of BiH jo ini ng NA TO.
Also, acco rdi ng to the su rvey co ndu cted by Ame ri can
Na ti onal De mo cra tic Insti tu te in RS, in 2009 only 12%
of the po pu la ti on su ppo rts BiH jo ini ng NA TO, a pe rce -
nta ge that is fi ve ti mes bi gger in the Fe de ra ti on. The se