Serbia is a dangerous place. Its attack on Croatia and Bosnia destabilized the entire Balkans and the ruthless policies of the communist dictator Slobodan Milosevic brought death, misery and despair to hundreds of thousands. One might imagine that after Milosevic and his cronies were driven from power by popular demonstrations, the Serbs, having found their voice and their political freedom, would have settled down to normal elective politics. As might be expected of a population denied a real vote for so long, there would have been the odd hiccup, but basically Serbia ought to be well on its way to becoming a representative democracy. Unfortunately, far from the odd hiccup, the democratic process seems to be smothering from complete lack of interest. For the third time, the country has failed to elect a new president because less than half the electorate turned out. Under Serbia’s constitution, the result is therefore void.
Local media report that Serbs are disillusioned with their squabbling politicians and are no longer interested in voting for any of them. In December, when the second failed presidential elections were held, it was notable that despite the desperate lobbying of supporters of Vojislav Kostunica, the hero of the protests which led to Milosevic’s downfall, the vote still was insufficient to be valid under the constitution. Now on the third attempt, the proportion of voters using the ballot was even lower.
Matters were not helped by the main opposition parties calling for their supporters to boycott the election. This is the behavior of the school playground, not of parliamentarians. Unless the opposition had clear proof of planned electoral malpractice, they should have encouraged their supporters to vote. Only after the election, if their suspicions were substantiated, should they have protested. Their misjudgment has made a bad situation worse. Serbia is not in limbo. Since the first abortive presidential elections, the acting president has been the speaker of the Serbian Parliament. And indeed Serbia may choose to follow Montenegro and do away with the minimum vote threshold. But this is not the point. Serbia’s politicians have clearly not only lost votes but the people’s trust as well.
There is thus a vacuum forming which might possibly be exploited by forces wishing to restore dictatorial rule. On the face of it, since Serbs seem to care so little for democracy, there will be little to stop these dark forces from returning. Optimists might argue that when their political freedoms have gone, Serbs will realize what they have lost. Realists might counter that Serbs, like the Russians, at bottom distrust representative government and secretly long for a strong leader. The disaster of Milosevic is not the lesson that many outsiders imagine. For his countrymen, the problem was not that Milosevic was a dictator but that he turned out to be not a very good one.
