DEMOCRACY AND SECURITY in Southeastern Europe, No 1

su rve ys only co nfi rm a tre nd evi de nt in the RS for a lo -
nger ti me, in which su ppo rt to BiH acce ssi on to NA TO
is incre asi ngly de cli ni ng. Ho we ver, re la ti ve ly si gni fi ca nt
de vi ati ons and di ffe re nces in info rma ti on, as we ll as the
la ck of cre di ble info rma ti on on the sa mple, ri ghtfu lly put
in qu esti on the cre di bi li ty and qu ali ty of the se pu blic opi -
ni on po lls. The ori gin of the oppo si ti on to NA TO me -
mbe rship by a ma jo ri ty of RS ci ti ze ns sho uld so ught in
the ne ga ti ve war and psycho lo gi cal expe ri ences of Se rbs
wi th this alli ance in the pa st pe ri od. NA TO ca rri ed out
a mi li ta ry inte rve nti on aga inst Se rb fo rces to wa rds the
end of the war in BiH in 1994 and 1995 and addi ti ona lly,
the mi li ta ry inte rve nti on on FR Yu go sla via in 1999, ca -
rri ed out wi tho ut the pe rmi ssi on of the UN Se cu ri ty Co -
uncil, pro vo ked even mo re ani mo si ty amo ng po li ti cal
pa rti es and pu blic opi ni on.
BiH jo ini ng NA TO sho uld not ne ce ssa ri ly be asso ci ated
to how offi ci al Se rbia wi ll po si ti on itse lf on this ma tter,
as has be en atte mpted in pu blic di scu ssi ons on this issue
in RS la te ly: the re la ti on of Se rbia and Se rbs in BiH to
NA TO from va ri ous po li ti cal co nte xts is not, and do es
not ha ve to be the sa me. For its own stra te gic re aso ns,
Se rbia has a ve ry ca re ful appro ach to the po ssi ble NA -
TO me mbe rship. At this mo me nt, it has de ci ded to cho -
ose mi li ta ry ne utra li ty, at the sa me ti me re fo rmi ng and
ada pti ng its Armed Fo rces to NA TO sta nda rds. In a re -
ce nt inte rvi ew to Ve ~e rnje No vo sti, Mi ni ster of Fo re ign
Affa irs of Se rbia, Vuk Je re mi }, expli ci tly sa id: “In any ca -
se, Se rbia has pre ci se ly de fi ned the po li cy of mi li ta ry ne -
utra li ty. We are not ente ri ng NA TO, or any other
mi li ta ry alli ance.” Atti tu des li ke this are a le gi ti ma te ri -
ght in the inte re st of the sta te of Se rbia. This atti tu de,
ho we ver, do es not ha ve to obli ge and li mit Se rbs from
BiH: Se rbs in BiH sho uld appro ach this issue pra gma ti -
ca lly, in the ir own inte re st and the inte re st of the jo int
sta te of BiH. RS po li ti cal re pre se nta ti ves sho uld su ppo -
rt BiH me mbe rship in NA TO, wi th fu ll unde rsta ndi ng of
a di ffe re nt ro ad for Se rbia. The issue of acce ssi on to NA -
TO is not under the ju ri sdi cti on of the enti ti es, but of
BiH as a sta te. As the Co nsti tu ti on of BiH do es not inclu -
de an insti tu ti on of re fe re ndum on any sta te issu es, it is
lo gi cal to co nclu de that the de ci si on on that can be ma -
de by re pre se nta ti ve le gi sla ti on bo di es of BiH. Not all
co untri es co ndu cted a re fe re ndum on jo ini ng NA TO
(No rway, Alba nia, Cro atia), but all of them ca re fu lly eva -
lu ated the ir inte re sts and he ld pu blic de ba tes. The re fo -
re, it is be tter to ma ke such an impo rta nt de ci si on in the
RS Na ti onal Asse mbly on the bro ade st mu lti pa rty co -
nse nsu al gro unds, and then ve ri fy it in the jo int bo di es
on the sta te le vel. In co mmi tti ng to NA TO, one sho uld
be re le ased from na ti onal myths, wro ng cho ices, po li ti -
cal mi sco nce pti ons, and fa lse mo ral and ele cti on ga mbli -
ng. Me mbe rship wi ll re qu ire a pra gma tic and ana lyti cal
eva lu ati on of one ’s own inte re sts, the inte re sts of the
othe rs, and the pe rce pti on of fu tu re eve nts in the re gi -
on and in the wo rld. It wi ll not be po ssi ble to ju sti fy wro -
ng de ci si ons by re fe rri ng to pe ople and hi di ng be hi nd
ci ti ze ns’ su ppo rt: Po li ti ci ans are not he re ju st to de fer
to pe ople ’s de ci si ons but to info rm and edu ca te pe ople
and pre se nt them cle ar po li ti cal alte rna ti ves, ta ki ng re -
spo nsi bi li ty for the be st po ssi ble cho ice.
* * *
At the be gi nni ng of the 21 st ce ntu ry, the se cu ri ty pa ra di -
gm, that is, the way of thi nki ng on pro vi di ng se cu ri ty of
each indi vi du al co untry and the wo rld as the who le, has
cha nged. To day, the re is no indi vi du al sta te which can
pro te ct itse lf aga inst new se cu ri ty thre ats. Wi tho ut co -
lle cti ve se cu ri ty to day the re are no gu ara nte es for the
se cu ri ty of any indi vi du al co untry, and ne ither for the
pe ace and sta bi li ty bo th in spe ci fic re gi ons and aro und
the wo rld. The ma in pri nci ple of co lle cti ve se cu ri ty was
de fe nse and pro te cti on of one co untry and all co untri -
es to ge ther. In the 21 st ce ntu ry, the go al of inte gra ti on
effo rts on the se cu ri ty le vel is di re cted to the cre ati on
of a “se cu ri ty co mmu ni ty” in each indi vi du al co untry, as
we ll as in the wo rld as the who le. That is why it is not
su rpri si ng to re ad the ne ws that one orga ni za ti on in Ru -
ssia is advo ca ti ng for Mo scow to jo in the EU and NA -
TO: ma ny thi ngs that se emed po li ti ca lly impo ssi ble only
ye ste rday lo ok re ali stic to day. Ma ybe so me new se cu ri -
ty cha lle nges and thre ats mi ght ma ke this co ope ra ti on
mo re po ssi ble in the fu tu re than it se ems to day. n
NOTES:
1
Mo re in the bo ok by Dra gan Bo ge ti }, Ju go sla vi ja i Za -
pad 1952-1955: ju go slo ve nsko pri bli `a va nje NA TO-u., (Be -
ograd: Slu `be ni gla snik, 2000).
2
Na ro dna sku p{ti na RS, Slu `be ni gla snik RS, Ba nja Lu -
ka, br. 63, 4. jul 2005, pp. 2-3.
3
Ibid, p. 3
4
Na ro dna sku p{ti na Re pu bli ke Srpske, Slu `be ni gla snik
RS, Ba nja Lu ka, br. 82, 8. se pte mbar 2005, p. 1.
5
Ibid, p. 2.
6
Pre dsta vni ~ki dom Pa rla me nta rne sku p{ti ne BiH, Za -
kon o odbra ni BiH, Slu `be ni gla snik BiH, Sa ra je vo,
2005, p. 26.
7
SNSD, Pro gram SNSD, Edi ci ja SNSD Do ku me nti, Ba -
nja Lu ka, fe bru ar/ma rt 2009, p.14.
8
Ibid, pp. 127-128. 19