
Nekategorisane


Announcement: Presentation of the Publication “How Do We Talk About War Crimes? – Analysis of the Presence of War Crimes, War Criminals, and the Discourse on War Crimes in the Media in Serbia” at the NDNV Premises
The publication “How Do We Talk About War Crimes? – Analysis of the Presence of War Crimes, War Criminals, and the Discourse on War Crimes in the Media in Serbia” will be presented on Thursday, July 11, 2024, at 10:30 AM at the premises of the Independent Journalists’ Association of Vojvodina, Sutjeska 2, in Novi Sad.
This publication is intended for journalists and media professionals, as the way media report on war crimes plays a crucial role in the process of reconciliation and building a just society. The discourse on war crimes is not just a matter of informing the public but is an important step towards understanding, acknowledging, and confronting the past. Ethical and professional reporting can contribute to reconciliation among communities, strengthen trust, and overcome deeply rooted traumas.
The methodology of the publication is based on an extensive content analysis of selected domestic media from April 2022 to August 2023. Over 2900 relevant mentions of war crimes and criminals were analyzed, including a detailed analysis of the tone and approach to reporting. In addition, interviews with journalists and editors who reported on this topic were conducted, providing a deeper insight into the challenges and needs of the media community. Existing international standards in this field were also examined to ensure alignment with best practices.
It is important to emphasize that a professional approach to reporting on war crimes and criminals not only contributes to accurate and responsible information but also shapes the broader public discourse. Each appearance of war criminals in the media must be contextualized to prevent manipulation and relativization of crimes. This publication highlights the necessity of discussing this topic with care and professionalism, as the way we talk about war crimes has far-reaching consequences for society as a whole.
Dr. Aleksandra Jerkov, the author, and Balša Božović, the project coordinator, will speak at the presentation.
Text of the Publication Available for Download HERE
You Can Find the Link to the Media Content Research HERE
The publication “How Do We Talk About War Crimes? – Analysis of the Presence of War Crimes, War Criminals, and the Discourse on War Crimes in the Media in Serbia” was created within the project supported by the broader initiative “Support to Local Civil Society Organizations – Transitional Justice and Trust-Building Initiatives in the Western Balkans – RECOM Reconciliation Network.” This project is implemented by the Humanitarian Law Center (Serbia), Humanitarian Law Center Kosovo (Kosovo), Association for Transitional Justice, Reconciliation and Remembrance (BiH), Center for Democracy and Transitional Justice (BiH), Center for Civic Education (Montenegro), and Institute for European Policy (North Macedonia), and is funded by the European Commission.
The opinions and views expressed in this publication are solely the responsibility of the authors and the Regional Academy for Development and Democracy, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the European Commission or the organizations implementing the “RECOM Reconciliation Network” program.


Regional Plenum “Quo vadis, Balkan? in Sarajevo: EU and Models of Integration – Is the Enlargement Policy Exhausted?”
The Fifth Regional Plenum “Quo vadis, Balkan?” is being held in Sarajevo from June 6 to June 8. As in previous years, it will gather a significant number of experts, officials, organizations, academic and state institutions, decision-makers, as well as media representatives, diplomatic envoys, and the academic community.
This year, the partner organizations of the Regional Academy for Democratic Development from Novi Sad and the Center for Civic Education from Podgorica in organizing the Plenum are the Faculty of Political Sciences of the University of Sarajevo, with support from the European Fund for the Balkans. The Regional Plenum “Quo vadis, Balkan?” is one of the most significant regional initiatives bringing together prominent civil society organizations, experts, and activists focusing on democracy, reconciliation, and regional cooperation.
The sixth panel at this year’s plenum was dedicated to the European Union and different models of integration. The speakers on the panel were Aurelie Valtat, Head of the Section for European Communications, Policy, and Information from the EU Delegation in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Dr. Nedžma Džananović, a professor at the Faculty of Political Sciences at the University of Sarajevo, Dr. Nikoleta Đukanović, a professor at the University of Donja Gorica from Montenegro, Dr. Adnan Huskić, a professor at the Sarajevo School of Science and Technology from Bosnia and Herzegovina, Nataša Vučković, Executive Director of the Center for Democracy Foundation from Serbia, and Dr. Vedran Džihić, a lecturer at the University of Vienna and a member of BIEPAG. The moderator was Prof. Dr. Ehlimana Spahić from the Faculty of Political Sciences at the University of Sarajevo.
Adnan Huskić assessed that the negotiation framework can be viewed from several different angles and that Montenegro is still able to complete the negotiation process, but that it is also showing signs of serious democratic regression. Adding that this is the case with other countries in the region, he stated that the process of democratic regression and advancement in European integration should by no means be parallel processes. He said that each round of enlargement brought a new type of problem, and for this reason, Western Balkan countries are expected to resolve all bilateral disputes before being admitted to the EU, and their problems are numerous. He mentioned that Bosnia and Herzegovina is the first highly decentralized state trying to join the EU, which imposes a new kind of obligation, and that there is no consensus within the EU on enlargement. He concluded that the enlargement process has become a political tool for the EU, as evidenced by developments with Moldova and Ukraine.
Nedžma Džanović added that February 2022 was a moment when the unimaginable happened for the EU, as war returned to European soil, and Europe’s response was the only possible one. This geopolitical shift significantly impacted the EU’s enlargement policy. This led to the realization that the enlargement policy does not exist as a real policy, not even as a goal, but rather as an alibi policy, a perspective offered without the likelihood of being realized anytime soon, the only instrument the EU has at its disposal. This applies to the enlargement policy towards the Western Balkans, as well as towards Ukraine, Moldova, and Georgia.
Nikoleta Đukanović stated that the EU is an unfinished political community, evident from its enlargement policy. She added that whenever the EU has been less present in the region, problems have arisen. She concluded that the EU’s policy is more driven by the fear of the influence of other major powers in the region. Adding that today we are talking about the process of EU reform and enlargement policy, she said that we have seen that the initiated reform has not yielded any results. She noted that it is obvious that the policy of conditionality no longer has the same impact on the Western Balkan countries as it once did, and that the longer the accession process takes, the more democracy erodes in negotiating countries. Speaking about Montenegro and its European integration, she concluded that if Montenegro, as it is today, is admitted to the EU in the next few years, it could cause numerous problems both in the EU and in Montenegro.
Nataša Vućković said that everyone agrees that the enlargement process appears exhausted, but it is not exhausted due to it being a technical process; it is political issues that have discredited the process. Citing the example of North Macedonia, she stated that no matter how enthusiastic governments are on this path, there can always be obstacles of a political nature. She said that in Serbia’s integration process, resolving the Kosovo issue has become the key moment of the entire process, questioning the significance of EU values. She added that another factor undermining the credibility of the enlargement policy is the constant change of approach, mechanisms, and priorities by the EU, requiring a lot of new energy and resource investment, while results are lacking. She emphasized that the policy of conditionality, which is in the forefront, is hard to sell, while partnership work, which yields much better results and contributes to better understanding between the two sides, is in the background. She highlighted the importance of the European Socio-Economic Committee’s pilot initiative to include members from the Western Balkans in its work, saying these are ways to ensure representatives of Western Balkan countries and their institutions are involved and present in EU activities and processes. She assessed that there are significant mistakes in the way the enlargement process is communicated by the EU and in the way reforms are communicated in the Western Balkan countries. She added that reforms carried out within European integration require a rational approach and a serious narrative, which often is lacking, and much attention must be paid to this communication. She concluded that it is clear that the political elites in the region do not see personal interest in the European integration process, but the motivation for every politician can be whether the process they are managing can lead to some result, and in that sense, it is crucial whether the real end of the process is visible.
Vedran Dražić emphasized that the question arises as to what is the area of experience we have when we talk about the integration of the Western Balkans into the EU, and unfortunately, it resembles the movie “Groundhog Day” where we wake up in a repeating reality for decades. The fact is that Montenegro began negotiations in 2012, Serbia in 2014, North Macedonia received candidate status in 2006, and this time dimension of the European integration process should always be in front of our eyes. On the other hand, listening to assessments of the European integration process, we have an incredible polyphony, and in some countries, like Serbia, since the beginning of the European integration process, there has been a regression of democracy. He said it is easier and more realistic to imagine a situation where the European integration process in the Western Balkans never ends, rather than one where it ends in the near future. He concluded that in our region, a new concept has emerged where a large part of our political elites tries to offer a concept for the present and future based on a past that is either invented or does not respond to any vision of a functional future, a process completely at odds with the concept of European integration.
Aurelie Valtat said that in the European integration process, it is desirable for countries to cooperate beyond and before the integration process and that this scenario complements the European integration process, not necessarily opposing it. She added that de-democratization is not specific to the Western Balkans; it is also present in the EU, and the key thing is how countries handle it. She stated that her impression is that, although it seems that the Western Balkans are no longer so important to the EU, the opposite is true – the EU wants the Western Balkans more than the Western Balkans want the European Union.

Balša Božović presented the award to the Mothers of Srebrenica
President of the Executive Board of the Regional Academy for Democratic Development, Balša Božović, presented the annual Award for Merits in the Fight for Democracy and Human Rights to the associations comprising the Mothers of Srebrenica.
The award was presented as part of the Regional Plenum “Quo vadis, Balkan?” organized for the third consecutive year by the Regional Academy for Democratic Development from Novi Sad and the Civic Education Center from Podgorica, this year in partnership with the Faculty of Political Sciences of the University of Sarajevo. The Regional Plenum is supported by the European Fund for the Balkans.
At the award ceremony held last night in Sarajevo, Balša Božović expressed his belief that the struggle of the Mothers of Srebrenica will inspire new generations to continue on the path of truth and justice, and that their story will set the wheel of moral responsibility in motion for the crimes committed. He particularly emphasized their crucial role in the international advocacy for the adoption of the United Nations Resolution on the remembrance of the genocide against Bosniaks in Srebrenica, significantly contributing to the global recognition and condemnation of this heinous crime.
Dean of the Faculty of Political Sciences, Sead Turčalo, pointed out that this award represents recognition of the tireless dedication of the Mothers of Srebrenica to the fight for justice, truth, and human rights, highlighting their invaluable contribution to fostering a culture of remembrance, facing the past, and providing support to survivors and their families.
In her acceptance speech, Kada Hotić, Vice President of the Association “Movement of the Mothers of the Enclaves of Srebrenica and Žepa,” stated that they harbor no hatred and wish for the world to know about the crimes that were committed.
“I want to have friends in Serbia, Montenegro, Slovenia, and beyond the borders of the former Yugoslavia, and I want us to be human,” said Hotić.
Photo: Radio Sarajevo

Regional Plenum Quo vadis, Balkan? in Sarajevo: Serbia and the Western Balkans – One Aggressive Actor is Enough for Conflict
The fifth Regional Plenum Quo vadis, Balkan? is being held in Sarajevo from June 6 to 8, and, as every year, it will gather a large number of experts, officials, organizations, academic and state institutions, decision-makers, as well as representatives of the media, diplomatic delegations, and the academic community.
This year, the partner of the Regional Academy for Democratic Development from Novi Sad and the Center for Civic Education from Podgorica in organizing the Plenum is the Faculty of Political Sciences at the University of Sarajevo, and it is realized with the support of the European Fund for the Balkans. The Regional Plenum Quo vadis, Balkan? is one of the most significant regional initiatives that brings together prominent civil society organizations, experts, and activists dealing with the topics of democracy, reconciliation, and regional cooperation.
The third panel at this year’s plenum was dedicated to the role that Serbia has in the Western Balkans. The speakers on the panel were Azem Vlasi, politician and lawyer from Kosovo, Izabela Kisić, deputy president of the Helsinki Committee for Human Rights, Branislav Radeljić, professor and consultant, Roman Jakič, former Minister of Defense in the Government of the Republic of Slovenia, and Adelheid Woelfl, journalist from Austria. The panel was moderated by Balša Božović, president of the Executive Board of the Regional Academy for Democratic Development.
Azem Vlasi stated that the bloody breakup of Yugoslavia began with the regime of Slobodan Milošević in Kosovo and that at the time everyone turned a blind eye, thinking that Serbia had some problem with Kosovo and that it was not a problem of Yugoslavia. He emphasized that the conflict with Greater Serbian politics, whose foundations were laid by the SANU Memorandum of 1986, started then and continued in 1989 when Kosovo’s autonomy was forcibly abolished. He pointed out that today, Kosovo is fully functional and has achieved its goals in that sense. He said that Kosovo has learned significant lessons from the past because it has been in the focus of Serbian politics from Milošević until today. He stressed that Serbia emphasizes Kosovo more than Vojvodina in its Constitution. He said that Serbia tries to create a separate entity connected to the Serbian government from the Association of Serb Municipalities and does not want to close the issue with Kosovo. Analyzing the idea of the Western Balkans, he said he believes it is Vučić’s idea, initially naively embraced by Edi Rama, but he is deeply convinced it is a Serbian-Russian project from which Rama quickly exited, realizing what it was about.
Branislav Radeljić said that when we talk about states within regional relations, power is the key term. Whether it’s about the struggle for power, the consolidation of power, or the manifestation of power, power is always at the center of state actions, and Serbia is no exception in this regard. He emphasized that it is important to ask why the regime in Serbia receives support from the West, although it is clear that it continuously seeks alternatives and does not clearly commit to EU membership.
Roman Jakič, former Minister of Defense in the Government of the Republic of Slovenia, said that when talking about Serbia, we must look at the period before, during, and after the breakup of Yugoslavia. Regarding the period before, we must be aware that Yugoslavia did not break up because there were no solutions, but because all proposed solutions were rejected by Slobodan Milošević. What happened during the breakup of Yugoslavia does not need special explanation in Sarajevo, which endured the longest siege in the history of warfare, with an average of 329 shells falling on the city daily, and in a country where genocide was committed. Regarding the period after the breakup of Yugoslavia, Jakič emphasized that Serbia needs a democratically oriented leader who would be a visionary, build bridges, and recognize European values. He concluded that due to the lack of such a policy, Russia has increased its influence not only in Serbia but also in the Western Balkans, aiming to provoke various conflicts to divert attention from its own actions. Speaking about Montenegro, he said it is unfortunate that Montenegro managed to ruin two decades of development in just four years.
Adelheid Woelfl highlighted that since coming to power, Vučić had the support of powerful parties from the European People’s Party (EPP), to which his party belongs. Many politicians in Europe thought that Edi Rama and Aleksandar Vučić would accelerate European integration and that Serbia was treated as a champion in European integration, although this was not true. She pointed out that it is extremely dangerous that many accepted even his stance that borders in the Balkans are negotiable.
Izabela Kisić said that Serbia is still trapped in the nationalism of the 1990s and that a debate like this would be impossible at Serbian universities. She emphasized that this does not mean that students and younger generations are not interested, and that the UN Resolution on Srebrenica opened this topic in society. She said that this resolution is extremely important in this sense and that the international community must insist on its implementation, especially in Serbia and Republika Srpska. Kisić said that Serbia expects a change in geopolitical circumstances, hoping that Ukraine will lose the war, which would create a new world order. She emphasized that although the regime in Serbia declares itself on a European path, it constantly stresses that geopolitical circumstances are changeable and acts accordingly. She concluded that this policy cannot be attributed to one person alone – neither to Milošević in the past nor to Vučić in the present. She highlighted that the ongoing annexation of Republika Srpska by Serbia is evident and that the adoption of documents and narratives accompanying numerous events organized by the state, including the All-Serbian Assembly scheduled for June 8, indicate this. She said that future developments will greatly depend on international circumstances. She expressed fear that the real goal of nationalist elites in Serbia is Republika Srpska. Commenting on the creation of the Association of Serb Municipalities, she said that she believes the Serbian government sees it as an opportunity to divide Kosovo and has promised this to Kosovo Serbs, keeping them in a constant state of conflict.

Regional Plenary “Quo Vadis, Balkan?” in Sarajevo: The New Constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina Must Be the Result of Broad Social Agreement, Professional Accountability, and Politics
**The Fifth Regional Plenary “Quo Vadis, Balkan?” Held in Sarajevo**
The fifth regional plenary “Quo Vadis, Balkan?” is being held in Sarajevo from June 6 to June 8. As in previous years, the event gathers a large number of experts, officials, organizations, academic and state institutions, decision-makers, as well as media representatives, diplomatic delegations, and members of the academic community.
This year, the partners of the Regional Academy for Democratic Development from Novi Sad and the Center for Civic Education from Podgorica in organizing the plenary are the Faculty of Political Sciences of the University of Sarajevo. The event is supported by the European Fund for the Balkans. The Regional Plenary “Quo Vadis, Balkan?” is one of the most significant regional initiatives bringing together prominent civil society organizations, experts, and activists focusing on democracy, reconciliation, and regional cooperation.
Yesterday afternoon, the plenary was opened at the Faculty of Political Sciences by Prof. Dr. Sead Turčalo, Dean of FPN US, Balša Božović, Executive Director of ADD, Daliborka Uljarević, Executive Director of CGO, and Aleksandra Tomanić, Executive Director of the European Fund for the Balkans (EFB), which supported this year’s plenary. The opening was followed by a conversation with the first president of Slovenia, Milan Kučan, about the ongoing impact of the breakup of Yugoslavia on political conditions in the Western Balkans. Additionally, there was a discussion on the topic “POLITICS AND RELIGION – WHERE DOES (MIS)USE BEGIN?” with prominent experts: Prof. Dr. Dubravka Stojanović, Prof. Dr. Dino Abazović, Prof. Dr. Boban Batrićević, and Prof. Dr. Branko Sekulić.
The second day of the plenary began with the panel “Bosnia and Herzegovina and the Need for a New Constitution,” featuring Sabina Ćudić, a representative in the House of Representatives of the Parliamentary Assembly of BiH, Sandra Benčić, a member of the Croatian Parliament, Dr. Slaven Kovačević, an expert on geopolitics and Euro-Atlantic integrations from Sarajevo, Dr. Lejla Balić, a professor at the Faculty of Law at the University of Sarajevo, and Prof. Čedomir Čupić, a retired professor from Serbia.
Professor Čedomir Čupić stated that when discussing this topic, the political level is fundamental, and that Bosnia and Herzegovina is not defined as a state by its constitution but as a democracy. He noted that it seems to him that Bosnia and Herzegovina is a unique example of a confederation of two entities where ethnic and civic principles are mixed. Its name is derived from a spatial rather than an ethnic determination, which he sees as a significant advantage. The religious affiliation of citizens greatly influences the functioning of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The war destroyed the individual as a political subject, and specific identities, in this case, religious and ethnic, have overtaken the civic identity, which is the ideal of any society. He concluded that this constitution cannot be changed in the political context of Bosnia and Herzegovina and that the only opportunity for change is the urgent admission of Bosnia and Herzegovina to the European Union, with any constitutional change requiring the strengthening of citizens’ rights and the central state, which are essential for the functioning of Bosnia and Herzegovina as a state.
Sandra Benčić, a member of the Croatian Parliament, emphasized that the “Možemo” party believes that the issue of protecting the Croatian people in Bosnia and Herzegovina cannot be resolved without considering the entire political context of the country. She stressed that the necessary constitutional changes for Bosnia and Herzegovina must be the culmination of a political and expert process and a dialogue on designing Bosnia and Herzegovina as a complete democratic state that balances civic and collective rights. She noted that this is a par excellence political issue that has been blocked due to political elites’ preference for the status quo, which is the main problem. Without different political forces and influences, the necessary dialogue cannot occur. She added that the citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina have not had the opportunity to discuss the kind of state and government they want, and this process must be linked to the process of Bosnia and Herzegovina joining the European Union. She highlighted that the constitution is primarily a political document, and only secondarily a legal one. She also pointed out the problem of inequality before the law among citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina, as evidenced by European Court of Human Rights rulings. She concluded that Croatian politics can provide support but must not offer any solutions to Bosnia and Herzegovina, as this must come from the citizens of Bosnia and Herzegovina.
Sabina Ćudić, a representative in the House of Representatives of the Parliamentary Assembly of BiH, emphasized that the constitution of Bosnia and Herzegovina was primarily adopted to stop the war, which is its greatest success. She stressed that the issue of constitutional change is a broader societal question that must involve experts, the responsibility of the academic community, and must be moved away from the exclusive decision-making of politicians, as most of the political community directly benefits from the current state and draws its legitimacy from the way Bosnia and Herzegovina is currently organized.
The Mothers of Srebrenica will be awarded the annual Award for Merit in the Fight for Democracy and Human Rights
Within the Sarajevo Plenum, organized by the Regional Academy for Democratic Development (ADD) from Novi Sad, the Center for Civic Education (CGO) from Podgorica, and the Faculty of Political Sciences at the University of Sarajevo (FPN US), the annual Award for Merit in the Fight for Democracy and Human Rights will be presented today to the Mothers of Srebrenica Association.
This award recognizes the tireless dedication of the Mothers of Srebrenica in their fight for justice, truth, and human rights. Their contribution to nurturing the culture of remembrance, confronting the past, and supporting survivors and their families is invaluable. In particular, we want to highlight their crucial role in advocating internationally for the adoption of the United Nations Resolution on the Remembrance of the Genocide against Bosniaks in Srebrenica, significantly contributing to the global recognition and condemnation of this gravest crime, as stated in the award’s explanation.
ADD, CGO, and FPN assess that the Mothers of Srebrenica’s fight for justice and truth has not only empowered survivors and the families of victims but has also provided the entire international community with an example of courage and dedication to human rights. Their activity continuously reminds the world of the importance of confronting the past to build a better future together.
The award ceremony will take place during the second day of the Sarajevo Plenum “Quo vadis, Balkan?”, one of the most significant regional initiatives that brings together prominent civil society organizations, experts, and activists dealing with democracy, reconciliation, and regional cooperation.
The Sarajevo Plenum was opened yesterday afternoon at the Faculty of Political Sciences by Prof. Dr. Sead Turčalo, Dean of FPN US, Balša Božović, Executive Director of ADD, Daliborka Uljarević, Executive Director of CGO, and Aleksandra Tomanić, Executive Director of the European Fund for the Balkans (EFB), which supported this edition of the plenum.
Božović: There is neither peace nor security in the Western Balkans with Vučić.
They defend themselves from any consideration of the rule of law and the possibility that they will one day have to answer for what they have done. Thus, it is necessary to once again fabricate some kind of “people’s event” to homogenize their strength to continue – says Božović, emphasizing that Vučić does not seek any support from the SPC, it is all a diversion to the public because the SPC is part of his organization which has absolute power.
The citizens of Serbia are prisoners of a synergy of crime, sin, and the heavenly empire. The moment that breaks the narrative of the “unity of the Serbs” is when the cartel is purged for everything it has done since the late eighties, through the nineties until today – evaluates Balša Božović, Executive Director of the Regional Academy for Democracy Development.
Absolute Power
Responding to the question about the aim of the announced Serbian assembly on May 5 and 6, and which political moment breaks the narrative of the unity of the Serbs, Božović says that the goal is absolute power at any cost.
– The main goal of the all-Serbian assembly, from the one at Gazimestan in 1989 to this Easter 2024, is the survival of the para-state cartel in power. The goal is absolute power at any cost. It is hard to find a rational explanation for their actions in such irrational impulses, but one thing is certain – until Serbia breaks with the policy of the para-state cartel, which officially began at the eighth session and unofficially much earlier, and confronts the crimes that arose from those few decades of their formal and informal power, there will be neither peace nor security in the Western Balkans. It’s not just up to the citizens of Serbia because they themselves are prisoners of that synergy of crime, sin, and the heavenly empire. The moment that breaks this story about the “unity of the Serbs” is when the cartel is purged for everything it has done from the late eighties through the nineties to today – says Božović.
New “People’s Event”
The Presidents of Serbia and the Republic of Srpska, while walking through a vineyard on Fruška Gora, looking at the Danube with the Patriarch of the SPC Porfirije, announced at the beginning of March that the all-Serbian assembly will take place on May 5 and 6, not only in Belgrade but also in other parts of Serbia.
“An assembly” will occur exactly one year after two massacres in Serbia committed by a minor (13 years old) and an adult (21 years old): the first burst into the classroom he attended and cold-bloodedly killed nine students and security workers, later another student died in the hospital, while the second killed nine and wounded 12 young people. However, none of the mentioned trio mentions the tragedy of the society and the state that peaked on May 3 and 5.
The goal of “assembling,” according to the President of Serbia, is to make important decisions about the survival of the Serbian people on their hearths, economic progress, preservation of the script, cultural heritage and of course these decisions should be adopted by the parliaments of Serbia and the Republic of Srpska.
The question arises – from what are Serbia and the Republic of Srpska defending themselves with these announced archaic gatherings and why does Vučić seek, as he said, “blessing and support from the SPC.”
– They defend themselves from any thought of the rule of law and from the fact that they will one day have to answer for what they have done. Therefore, it is necessary to once again fabricate some kind of “people’s event” to homogenize the strength to continue – says Božović and points out that Vučić does not seek any support from the SPC, it is all a diversion to the public because the SPC is part of his organization which has absolute power.
– The para-state cartel consists of the mafia, the party, state security, and the SPC at whose head is Aleksandar Vučić. They strive to perpetuate the narrative of endangered Serbdom, according to the model “one people, one country, one leader”, to absolve themselves for several decades of sowing evil across the region and Serbia – says Božović.
Vučić’s Whining
The daily whining about great pressures on Serbia in the media appearances of the President of Serbia has become usual, and to make it more convincing, an enemy from the West has been invented.
Asked how he sees this Vučić’s lamentation that he is exposed to external pressures, and when he goes abroad he does not mention the pressures, Božović answers:
– The whining is part of the hysteria that needs to generate hatred towards the “enemies of Serbdom.” Vučić took over the cartel once led by Milo
šević, then Koštunica. He has diligently learned from their mistakes. Raised by Vojislav Šešelj and educated by Dragoš Kalajić, he has become a hybrid Greater Serbian nationalist eager to enter the history textbooks. Submissive to those stronger than himself, a ruthless bully towards the weaker, he conducts a policy that tells the great powers, either in the East or the West, what they want to hear. Meanwhile, he prepares the domestic public for conflict with states and nations in the region, hindering their European path and threatening their sovereignty. He has staked everything on the bet that in Europe, right-wing populists will win the next elections, and Trump will win in the USA, perhaps then having more favorable international circumstances for Serbia to be at least a square meter larger than it is today – concludes Božović.
(Source: Portal Analitika)