August 31, 2000
August 29, 2000
August 28, 2000
August 27, 2000
August 26, 2000
Http://www.siri-us.com
Who Guards The Guardian?
Regarding "Counting Corpses in Kosovo"
Aug. 26, 2000
Dear Sir,
Regarding "Counting Corpses in Kosovo," which I read with considerable
interest: "If you cannot attack the facts, attack the person." Such a
classic ad hominem -- to attack your opponents as "revisionists." And
how Marxist.
You show the same sensitivity for ad misericordiam, but only
for families of the KLA and not for the thousands relatives of Albanian,
Roma, Gorani, Serb and Turkish victims of those homicidal Geg
xenophobes.
Who else is to guard The Guardian from the likes of your propaganda? We
"revisionists" began our attempts to counter a blatantly racist
anti-Serb propaganda long before Nato's illegal air war began and based
our
fight on provable facts, not propaganda constructed out of fallacies of
vicious abstraction, ambiguity and emotion. We have an evidence trail
leading
back to 1986 demonstrating the lies told by American politicians to
misrepresent the facts in Kosovo. News reports from the New York Times
and Washington
Post document Albanian ethnic cleansing of Serbs and others, plus
general
misrule in Kosovo, back to 1980.
It remains that the Geg clans of the KLA are directly linked to the Nazi
SS Skanderbeg of World War 2, as well as to other fascist gangs and to
today's Kosovo heroin Mafia, which also traffics in white slavery and
immigrant
smuggling. You would do well to do a better job of choosing your allies
and designated "victims."
Who was practicing genocide and ethnic cleansing before and after the
air war? Kosovo's Jewish community has been cleansed, as have two
thirds of
its Roma, Serbs, Turks, Gorani and others. It is clear that Muslims as
well
as Christians have been cleansed by the KLA, even non-Geg Albanophones
have
been attacked, such as the Egyptian communities. Where are the hundred
thousand dead victims of "the Serbs?"
Human rights are a charter for those who behave, it is not carte blanche
for racists and xenophobes. The Gegs are the lords of misrule, as every
soldier in K-For and every policeman in UNMIK now knows. --Those
unbiased
personnel, by the way, found no death camps or rape camps, while the
forensics
teams found plenty of dead Serbs and victims of Nato bombs in your
alleged
"mass graves" --most of which featured coffins and individual grave
holes.
You frame your argument by quoting other liars, including US propaganda
inserted in Lancet --why would someone have to extrapolate a body count
of
12,000 when the UN and Nato occupy the ground? (Why too, did Lancet
allow
itself to become a propaganda vehicle?) You elide nicely over the
inconvenient
fact that all such numbers include the thousands of victims of the KLA
and
Nato's humanitarian bombing.
The only "strong evidence" of "incineration" of victims was found at
Klecka
in the summer of 1998, and it was a little KLA death camp
for Serbs, not Serb "einsatzgruppen" cleaning up massacre sites.
History reflects human nature, which gets even with propaganda and
propagandists over time. You have picked the wrong legal and
intellectual side, and thus, have no credibility. Keep braying to
protect your
journalistic "integrity:" the more strident you get, the more pathetic
your outcome. It is civilization's shame that people are still dying so
that
the reputations of politicians and journalists may be protected by a
smokescreen of spin doctoring.
How dare you call us "revisionists?" You, as a propagandist for the "new
left" are such a little-minded creature, pretending as a man and
"journalist." We "revisionists" shall be delighted to stop having to
tell the truth about the KLA and about you, once you stop lying about
the
people of Yugoslavia and about us.
Sincerely,
Benjamin Works
Executive Director
The Strategic Issues Research Institute
WWW.SIRI-US
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Counting corpses in Kosovo
Jukian Borger. The Guardian
The last indignity for these sufferers is to be disbelieved Those who
are
digging up Kosovo's corpses know what the truth is Special report:
Kosovo
by Julian Borger, in The Guardian / Guardian Unlimited, Aug 25, 2000
(URL of original article:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,358691,00.html)
Fate has saved up one last indignity for the people of Kosovo. They
lost
relatives in last year's bloodletting, they saw loved ones executed
before
their eyes, and they were driven from their homes. Now - just as they
are
struggling to rebuild their lives - they are being called liars and
accused
of faking their grief for political gain.
The Kosovo backlash is in full swing. The criticism of last year's Nato
campaign against the Serbs - quite properly - opened a debate over
"humanitarian intervention" and whether such intervention should involve
dropping cluster bombs from high altitude.
But the backlash has gone further, casting doubt on the scale and
nature of
Serb atrocities and calling into question eyewitness accounts of the
killing.
The allegations are serious - hinting at a conspiracy between Nato, the
press, the humanitarian agencies and the refugees themselves - yet they
are
based on no more than partial and misconstrued evidence.
The starting point for the wave of revisionism has been the exhumations
carried out by the international war crimes tribunal in the Hague. As of
mid-July, tribunal investigators confirmed they had recovered the
remains of
2,808 bodies, believed to be victims of the Serb ethnic cleansing
campaign.
That routine announcement triggered reports that the total death toll
had
been less than 3,000 and that Nato (with the aid of its co-conspirators)
had
deliberately inflated the casualty figures, with estimates of 10,000
dead and
more, to justify its intervention.
No one is more bemused by these claims than their supposed source - the
Hague tribunal itself. Paul Risley, the chief prosecutor's spokesman,
says he
is unsure how his tally of exhumations to date came to be portrayed as a
final toll.
The search for bodies is continuing. Seven forensic teams are currently
probing Kosovo's tortured earth, and aim to investigate another 150
reported
grave sites before winter sets in. That will leave 200 sites to go. And
more
are being reported all the time.
In October, the tribunal will make a decision as to whether to continue
its
forensic work. If the digging is called off, it will be because the
prosecutors believe they have enough evidence to mount a war crimes case
against the Serb leadership in Belgrade. It will not be because there
are no
more bodies to find.
According to Risley, there is a rule of thumb among those whose job it
is to
literally pick up the pieces after such bloody conflicts. You seldom
find
more than half the bodies. Kosovo is unlikely to be an exception.
Returning
refugees found the bodies of their friends and relatives lying in their
houses or gardens, in roadside ditches, or scattered through the forests
and
mountains. The remains were quickly buried in individual graves, prayers
spoken and word was passed about who had been found. There was no reason
to
seek out the Red Cross to add their names to the list of the missing.
Their
fate was known.
In nearby Bosnia, five years after the war, war crimes investigators
are
still stumbling across more graves, still finding bones on hillsides.
The
search will take years in Kosovo as well, and there is reason to believe
that
even fewer of the bodies will be found. If there was one lesson
President
Milosevic took from Bosnia, it was to make more of an effort to hide the
evidence.
Several mass graves in Kosovo were systematically emptied last summer
by the
retreating Serb troops. In the village of Izbica, there was
well-documented
evidence, including videotape and satellite photographs, of the killing
and
burial of nearly 150 Kosovans in an open pasture. By the time Nato
arrived,
the field was a mass of churned earth scarred by the caterpillar tracks
of
heavy diggers. The same happened in Pusto Selo, near Orahovac, and the
hamlet
of Rezalla, north of Pristina. There is strong evidence that some of the
bodies were incinerated in factories, or in some cases burnt on bonfires
at
the murder scene.
Sure enough, some wild figures did fly about for a few days. The US
defence
secretary, William Cohen, said in May that 100,000 military-aged men
were
missing and "may have been murdered". That was clearly an exaggeration,
but
not much of a conspiracy. The 100,000 figure never gained wide
circulation
and the estimate most often quoted by Nato officials was 10,000 dead, a
guess
shared by many humanitarian workers on the borders at the time. Today,
it
still looks like a reasonable assessment.
In the absence of complete forensic evidence, the only feasible
scientific
way of gauging the extent of the bloodshed is to take sample surveys of
the
population and extrapolate. One such epidemiological survey was
published in
the Lancet in July, estimating that 12,000 people had been killed by
"war-related trauma" in Kosovo from February 1998 to June 1999.
On one issue, human rights organisations are agreed. The testimony
provided
by the traumatised refugees as they arrived at the Macedonian, Albanian
and
Montenegrin borders last year was eventually borne out by the facts.
There is
no evidence of any concerted effort to deceive or exaggerate. The idea
that
these exhausted terrified people had time to concoct coherent,
corroborated
testimony is as absurd as it is offensive.
Joanne Mariner, a researcher for Human Rights Watch who trudged across
Kosovo for months checking and rechecking reports of atrocities, said:
"The
refugees never cited numbers. They talked about who they had seen
killed. All
the reports I investigated based on what I was told - they all turned
out to
be true. I went to the villages and checked them out."
We have been here before. There has been a campaign to deny the
existence of
death camps in Bosnia. There was talk that the death toll from the
Srebrenica
massacre had been inflated. Rumours were spread that the Bosnian Muslims
in
Sarajevo were shelling themselves. None of these claims, of course,
turned
out to be true.
The west stopped the killing in Bosnia three years too late, after
100,000
or more victims were already dead. In Kosovo, an attempt was made to
learn
from the past, and to act sooner rather than later. It is a tough
decision to
take, but one that could not and should not be dodged. Or should we
watch
from afar as the victims wail with grief on our television screens, and
then
a year or so later - when the dead have long been buried and memories
have
blurred - decide that maybe all those screaming foreigners were just
trying
to fool us after all?
julian.borger@guardian.co.uk
Who Guards The Guardian?
Regarding "Counting Corpses in Kosovo"
Aug. 26, 2000
Dear Sir,
Regarding "Counting Corpses in Kosovo," which I read with considerable
interest: "If you cannot attack the facts, attack the person." Such a
classic ad hominem -- to attack your opponents as "revisionists." And
how Marxist.
You show the same sensitivity for ad misericordiam, but only
for families of the KLA and not for the thousands relatives of Albanian,
Roma, Gorani, Serb and Turkish victims of those homicidal Geg
xenophobes.
Who else is to guard The Guardian from the likes of your propaganda? We
"revisionists" began our attempts to counter a blatantly racist
anti-Serb propaganda long before Nato's illegal air war began and based
our
fight on provable facts, not propaganda constructed out of fallacies of
vicious abstraction, ambiguity and emotion. We have an evidence trail
leading
back to 1986 demonstrating the lies told by American politicians to
misrepresent the facts in Kosovo. News reports from the New York Times
and Washington
Post document Albanian ethnic cleansing of Serbs and others, plus
general
misrule in Kosovo, back to 1980.
It remains that the Geg clans of the KLA are directly linked to the Nazi
SS Skanderbeg of World War 2, as well as to other fascist gangs and to
today's Kosovo heroin Mafia, which also traffics in white slavery and
immigrant
smuggling. You would do well to do a better job of choosing your allies
and designated "victims."
Who was practicing genocide and ethnic cleansing before and after the
air war? Kosovo's Jewish community has been cleansed, as have two
thirds of
its Roma, Serbs, Turks, Gorani and others. It is clear that Muslims as
well
as Christians have been cleansed by the KLA, even non-Geg Albanophones
have
been attacked, such as the Egyptian communities. Where are the hundred
thousand dead victims of "the Serbs?"
Human rights are a charter for those who behave, it is not carte blanche
for racists and xenophobes. The Gegs are the lords of misrule, as every
soldier in K-For and every policeman in UNMIK now knows. --Those
unbiased
personnel, by the way, found no death camps or rape camps, while the
forensics
teams found plenty of dead Serbs and victims of Nato bombs in your
alleged
"mass graves" --most of which featured coffins and individual grave
holes.
You frame your argument by quoting other liars, including US propaganda
inserted in Lancet --why would someone have to extrapolate a body count
of
12,000 when the UN and Nato occupy the ground? (Why too, did Lancet
allow
itself to become a propaganda vehicle?) You elide nicely over the
inconvenient
fact that all such numbers include the thousands of victims of the KLA
and
Nato's humanitarian bombing.
The only "strong evidence" of "incineration" of victims was found at
Klecka
in the summer of 1998, and it was a little KLA death camp
for Serbs, not Serb "einsatzgruppen" cleaning up massacre sites.
History reflects human nature, which gets even with propaganda and
propagandists over time. You have picked the wrong legal and
intellectual side, and thus, have no credibility. Keep braying to
protect your
journalistic "integrity:" the more strident you get, the more pathetic
your outcome. It is civilization's shame that people are still dying so
that
the reputations of politicians and journalists may be protected by a
smokescreen of spin doctoring.
How dare you call us "revisionists?" You, as a propagandist for the "new
left" are such a little-minded creature, pretending as a man and
"journalist." We "revisionists" shall be delighted to stop having to
tell the truth about the KLA and about you, once you stop lying about
the
people of Yugoslavia and about us.
Sincerely,
Benjamin Works
Executive Director
The Strategic Issues Research Institute
WWW.SIRI-US
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Counting corpses in Kosovo
Jukian Borger. The Guardian
The last indignity for these sufferers is to be disbelieved Those who
are
digging up Kosovo's corpses know what the truth is Special report:
Kosovo
by Julian Borger, in The Guardian / Guardian Unlimited, Aug 25, 2000
(URL of original article:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,358691,00.html)
Fate has saved up one last indignity for the people of Kosovo. They
lost
relatives in last year's bloodletting, they saw loved ones executed
before
their eyes, and they were driven from their homes. Now - just as they
are
struggling to rebuild their lives - they are being called liars and
accused
of faking their grief for political gain.
The Kosovo backlash is in full swing. The criticism of last year's Nato
campaign against the Serbs - quite properly - opened a debate over
"humanitarian intervention" and whether such intervention should involve
dropping cluster bombs from high altitude.
But the backlash has gone further, casting doubt on the scale and
nature of
Serb atrocities and calling into question eyewitness accounts of the
killing.
The allegations are serious - hinting at a conspiracy between Nato, the
press, the humanitarian agencies and the refugees themselves - yet they
are
based on no more than partial and misconstrued evidence.
The starting point for the wave of revisionism has been the exhumations
carried out by the international war crimes tribunal in the Hague. As of
mid-July, tribunal investigators confirmed they had recovered the
remains of
2,808 bodies, believed to be victims of the Serb ethnic cleansing
campaign.
That routine announcement triggered reports that the total death toll
had
been less than 3,000 and that Nato (with the aid of its co-conspirators)
had
deliberately inflated the casualty figures, with estimates of 10,000
dead and
more, to justify its intervention.
No one is more bemused by these claims than their supposed source - the
Hague tribunal itself. Paul Risley, the chief prosecutor's spokesman,
says he
is unsure how his tally of exhumations to date came to be portrayed as a
final toll.
The search for bodies is continuing. Seven forensic teams are currently
probing Kosovo's tortured earth, and aim to investigate another 150
reported
grave sites before winter sets in. That will leave 200 sites to go. And
more
are being reported all the time.
In October, the tribunal will make a decision as to whether to continue
its
forensic work. If the digging is called off, it will be because the
prosecutors believe they have enough evidence to mount a war crimes case
against the Serb leadership in Belgrade. It will not be because there
are no
more bodies to find.
According to Risley, there is a rule of thumb among those whose job it
is to
literally pick up the pieces after such bloody conflicts. You seldom
find
more than half the bodies. Kosovo is unlikely to be an exception.
Returning
refugees found the bodies of their friends and relatives lying in their
houses or gardens, in roadside ditches, or scattered through the forests
and
mountains. The remains were quickly buried in individual graves, prayers
spoken and word was passed about who had been found. There was no reason
to
seek out the Red Cross to add their names to the list of the missing.
Their
fate was known.
In nearby Bosnia, five years after the war, war crimes investigators
are
still stumbling across more graves, still finding bones on hillsides.
The
search will take years in Kosovo as well, and there is reason to believe
that
even fewer of the bodies will be found. If there was one lesson
President
Milosevic took from Bosnia, it was to make more of an effort to hide the
evidence.
Several mass graves in Kosovo were systematically emptied last summer
by the
retreating Serb troops. In the village of Izbica, there was
well-documented
evidence, including videotape and satellite photographs, of the killing
and
burial of nearly 150 Kosovans in an open pasture. By the time Nato
arrived,
the field was a mass of churned earth scarred by the caterpillar tracks
of
heavy diggers. The same happened in Pusto Selo, near Orahovac, and the
hamlet
of Rezalla, north of Pristina. There is strong evidence that some of the
bodies were incinerated in factories, or in some cases burnt on bonfires
at
the murder scene.
Sure enough, some wild figures did fly about for a few days. The US
defence
secretary, William Cohen, said in May that 100,000 military-aged men
were
missing and "may have been murdered". That was clearly an exaggeration,
but
not much of a conspiracy. The 100,000 figure never gained wide
circulation
and the estimate most often quoted by Nato officials was 10,000 dead, a
guess
shared by many humanitarian workers on the borders at the time. Today,
it
still looks like a reasonable assessment.
In the absence of complete forensic evidence, the only feasible
scientific
way of gauging the extent of the bloodshed is to take sample surveys of
the
population and extrapolate. One such epidemiological survey was
published in
the Lancet in July, estimating that 12,000 people had been killed by
"war-related trauma" in Kosovo from February 1998 to June 1999.
On one issue, human rights organisations are agreed. The testimony
provided
by the traumatised refugees as they arrived at the Macedonian, Albanian
and
Montenegrin borders last year was eventually borne out by the facts.
There is
no evidence of any concerted effort to deceive or exaggerate. The idea
that
these exhausted terrified people had time to concoct coherent,
corroborated
testimony is as absurd as it is offensive.
Joanne Mariner, a researcher for Human Rights Watch who trudged across
Kosovo for months checking and rechecking reports of atrocities, said:
"The
refugees never cited numbers. They talked about who they had seen
killed. All
the reports I investigated based on what I was told - they all turned
out to
be true. I went to the villages and checked them out."
We have been here before. There has been a campaign to deny the
existence of
death camps in Bosnia. There was talk that the death toll from the
Srebrenica
massacre had been inflated. Rumours were spread that the Bosnian Muslims
in
Sarajevo were shelling themselves. None of these claims, of course,
turned
out to be true.
The west stopped the killing in Bosnia three years too late, after
100,000
or more victims were already dead. In Kosovo, an attempt was made to
learn
from the past, and to act sooner rather than later. It is a tough
decision to
take, but one that could not and should not be dodged. Or should we
watch
from afar as the victims wail with grief on our television screens, and
then
a year or so later - when the dead have long been buried and memories
have
blurred - decide that maybe all those screaming foreigners were just
trying
to fool us after all?
julian.borger@guardian.co.uk
Politika Vreme broj 503, 26. avgust 2000.
Ko�tunica na prkosima
Uzimanje mere
Predsedni�ki kandidat Demokratske opozicije Vojislav Ko�tunica mogao bi u drugom krugu da pobedi Slobodana Milo�evi�a �ak sa 47:27. To je raspolo�enje javnog mnjenja. To, me�utim, jo� nije izborni rezultat
Kada je 4. avgusta 2000. Demokratska opozicija odlu�ila da kandiduje Vojislava Ko�tunicu za predsedni�ke izbore, bilo je odlu�eno da se sa objavljivanjem te �injenice sa�eka tri dana kako se ne bi prejudicirale o�ekivane odluke Srpskog pokreta obnove i crnogorskih partija. Me�utim, kako su se uhvatili za kvaku, pojedini opozicioni lideri su se raspri�ali pred novinarima. Neboj�a �ovi� iza�av�i iz sale odmeri pogledom Dragana Veselinova okru�enog kasetofonima i dobaci: "Vidi se da nisu bio u SPS-u! Disciplina, disciplina!" Opoziciona stvar – i dogovori i sva�e – nekako su javna stvar, i tu se tajne te�ko �uvaju a informacije lako cure, �to je mo�da dobro, a mo�e biti i �tetno.
Tako je i ovih dana procurelo da je Centar za politikolo�ka istra�ivanja i javno mnjenje Instituta dru�tvenih nauka radio jedno "istra�ivanje za naru�ioca", o kome nije obave�tavao javnost. Po tom, avgustovskom, istra�ivanju za predsedni�kog kandidata Demokratske opozicije Srbije Vojislava Ko�tunicu glasalo bi 35 odsto bira�a, za Slobodana Milo�evi�a 23 odsto, a za Vojislava Mihajlovi�a i Tomislava Nikoli�a po pet odsto. Vest je objavio B2-92, verovatno na osnovu opozicionog izvora. Po tom istra�ivanju ostali kandidati bi sakupili tri odsto glasova, a 29 odsto je zbir neodlu�nih i onih koji ne bi iza�li na izbore. Potom je procurelo jo� nekoliko detalja iz kojih proizilazi da bi, sude�i po trenutnom raspolo�enju javnog mnjenja merenog na uzorku od 1700 gra�ana na teritoriji Srbije bez Kosova, Ko�tunica u drugom krugu pobedio Slobodana Milo�evi�a �ak sa 47:27.
Neodlu�ni glasa�i i izborni apstinenti bi u tom slu�aju �inili zbir od 26 odsto. Ovo istra�ivanje je ra�eno u avgustu, po objavljivanju imena klju�nih predsedni�kih kandidata...
Rezultati su zanimljivi utoliko �to je ranije istra�ivanje CPIJM-a, obavljeno 11-15. jula 2000, pokazivalo da bi Vojislav Ko�tunica kao jedinstveni kandidat opozicije mogao da dobije 42 odsto bira�kog tela, a za Slobodana Milo�evi�a bi glasalo 28 odsto bira�a. To zna�i da je pojava vi�e kandidata "o�tetila" Ko�tunicu za sedam, a Milo�evi�a za pet odsto glasova.
Iz nekih razloga produbljuje se javna podr�ka Ko�tunici (slogan njegovog DSS-a: "Prkos, lekovito bilje protiv tiranije"). Uspon Ko�tunice na rang ozbiljnog pretendenta trebalo bi tek da bude predmet obja�njenja. Jedan iskusan politikolog samo, ne bez uzbu�enja, konstatuje: "De�ava se ne�to vrlo interesantno..." U pro�logodi�njim anketama je eks-guverner Dragoslav Avramovi� bio politi�ar koji bi nai�ao na najmanji otpor – samo 21 odsto anketiranih izja�njavalo se o njemu negativno, o Ko�tunici se samo 29 odsto gra�ana izra�avalo negativno, o Milo�evi�u 56, o Dra�kovi�u 52, o �in�i�u 57, a o �e�elju 64 odsto.
Gotovo �itavu godinu dana razli�ite istra�iva�ke agencije bele�e ina�e rast opozicionog raspolo�enja. Interesantno je i to da se ve� nekoliko meseci istra�ivanja razli�itih agencija u osnovi sla�u i kad je u pitanju rejting politi�ara i izborna sklonost bira�a.
U pro�li ponedeljak direktor agencije "Medijum" Srbobran Brankovi� kao gost Pres kluba konstatovao je, na primer, da istra�ivanja javnog mnjenja nekoliko relevantnih agencija pokazuju da bi na izborima za predsednika SRJ za Vojislava Ko�tunicu glasalo 30 odsto bira�a, za Slobodana Milo�evi�a 25, za Tomislava Nikoli�a 10 do 15, a za Vojislava Mihailovi�a od osam do deset odsto bira�a u Srbiji.
Ti procenti nisu identi�ni onima koji se vezuju uz rezultate CPIJM-a ali u osnovi govore isto – o znatnoj prednosti Vojislava Ko�tunice.
LJUTNJA: Naravno, bilo je odmah "ljutnji na ogledalo". SPO je najglasnije vrisnuo zbog toga �to se predsedni�ki kandidat Vojislav Mihailovi� nisko kotira. Zoran Lutovac je recimo pre dve nedelje izneo podatak iz anketa CPIJM-a ra�enih u januaru u kojima se vidi da Vojislav Mihailovi�, tada nenominovani kandidat SPO-a, ima podr�ku 12 odsto bira�a, od toga samo pet odsto �vrste podr�ke. Nova istra�ivanja, posle "pu�tanja predsedni�ke trke", pokazuju prili�no veliko slaganje sa tim prethodnim sonda�ama – g. Mihailovi� je u trenutku kandidovanja dobio ta�nu informaciju o svojoj startnoj poziciji.
Utoliko gore po sonda�e! Portparol SPO-a Ivan Kova�evi� izjavljuje da je Mihailovi�ev protivnik u DOS-u odre�en po sistemu "rekla mi jedna baba", �ak je i predsednik Gradskog odbora SPO-a statisti�ar Miladin Kova�evi� optu�io DOS da preko dnevne �tampe plasira neistine o rejtingu predsedni�kog kandidata Vojislava Mihailovi�a, da se radi o la�nim anketama jer, prema njegovim re�ima, rezultati istra�ivanja koje sprovodi SPO govore o prednosti Mihailovi�a u odnosu na ostale predsedni�ke kandidate, te da u op�tini Zemun i Stari grad predsedni�ki kandidat SPO-a nadmo�no vodi u odnosu na ostale pretendente. Ni drugi politi�ki akteri nisu ostali ravnodu�ni. Vojislav �e�elj je u jednom TV intervjuu tvrdio da nijedna agencija do sada nije pogodila izbore, �to nije ta�no – Centar za politikolo�ka istra�ivanja i javno mnjenje, ve� pominjani CPIJM, pogodio je vi�e puta izborni rezultat, rang pojedinih stranaka i predsedni�kih kandidata. Dodu�e, nisu mogli da pogode ta�an procenat radikalskih pristalica, ali su poga�ali i njihov izborni rang. Ka istra�iva�ima javnog mnjenja usledili su i diskvalifikatorski napadi u dr�avnim medijima.
"RAZMI�LJANJE O POVLA�ENJU": To mora biti znak da mo�da ima ne�eg �to nije samo politi�ko agitovanje u onome �to je pro�le nedelje saop�tila �ovi�eva Demokratska alternativa, koja tvrdi da je iz izvora bliskih Jugoslovenskoj levici saznala da je Socijalisti�ka partija Srbije organizovala veliko istra�ivanje raspolo�enja bira�a u Beogradu, prema kojem je, od 3000 gra�ana, 60 odsto odgovorilo da �e glas dati Demokratskoj opoziciji Srbije, a samo 25 odsto da �e na izborima zaokru�iti levicu. Demokratska alternativa �ak tvrdi da predsednik SRJ Slobodan Milo�evi� "ozbiljno razmi�lja da povu�e kandidaturu" za �efa dr�ave, ali da se s tim "ne sla�e njegova supruga", te da je pro�log petka, kada su analizirani rezultati istra�ivanja, zaklju�eno da je jedina mogu�nost da se izbegne totalni izborni fijasko razbijanje Demokratske opozicije Srbije.
Srbobran Brankovi�, me�utim, naslu�uje da bi se moglo o�ekivati da radikali u poslednjem trenutku povuku kandidaturu Tomislava Nikoli�a da bi koncentrisali glasove oko Slobodana Milo�evi�a. Za sada je predsednik Predsedni�tva Stranke srpskog jedinstva Borislav Pelevi� saop�tio da ne prihvata kandidaturu za predsednika SRJ, pristalice svoje stranke pozvao je da glasaju za kandidata SPS-a ili SRS-a.
Nervozi SPO-a mo�da doprinosi i pritisak koji se vr�i na njihovog predsedni�kog kandidata iz opozicionih redova i iz redova SPO-a da razmisli o povla�enju (vidi tekst "Vesela kampanja", str.10).
Raspolo�enje javnog mnjenja jo� nije izborna odluka. Bi�e mnogo faktora u igri, spoljnih i unutra�njih. Srbobran Brankovi� procenjuje da bi se, kad bi ishod izbora zavisio samo od politi�kog raspolo�enja, mo�da �ak mogla o�ekivati pobeda opozicije u prvom krugu. Rezultati, me�utim, ne�e zavisiti samo od toga, jer ukoliko crnogorske partije budu bojkotovale izbore, zna se da bi to vladaju�im strankama donelo 30 poslani�kih mesta u Ve�u gra�ana i 20 poslanika u Ve�u republika. Uz to, lokalni izbori sa dve opozicione liste mogu se smatrati izgubljenim, sa odrazom na pona�anje bira�a u drugom krugu predsedni�kih izbora.
GEOMETRIJA: Matemati�ar Lav Ivanovi�, profesor univerziteta, saradnik CESID-a, u Pres klubu 21. avgusta upozorava na ne�to o �emu izborne studije govore – kada vladaju�e partije imaju preko 25 odsto bira�a koji glasaju za njih, to im daje mogu�nost da izbornom geometrijom i pode�avanjem izbornih uslova udese da dobiju ve�inu. Lav Ivanovi� konstatuje da vladaju�e partije to rade stru�no. Verovatno je da �e vladaju�e stranke profitirati na tome �to su kosovske izborne jedinice priklju�ene izbornim jedinicama Prokuplje i Vranje. Na tim izbornim jedinicama bi�e veoma te�ko kontrolisati glasanje. Tome doprinosi i dosad nepoznata odredba da glasa�, ako doka�e da nije u mogu�nosti da glasa na bira�kom mestu na kome je upisan, mo�e to u�initi na bilo kom mestu. Niko ne zna kako �e se ti listi�i kontrolisati, jer su sada�nje odredbe nejasne. Sam broj od oko 250.000 "kosovskih glasova" ne mora da bude presudan u predsedni�kim izborima, pa �ak ni na izborima za Ve�e republika u kojima je jedna republika jedna izborna jedinica, ali na izborima za Ve�e gra�ana bi�e va�ni.
�to se Crne Gore ti�e, tu re�im koristi jednostavnu, ve� uhodanu tehniku: gde postoji politi�ki spor radi na tome da bira�i ne iza�u na birali�te, konstatuje Ivanovi�. U me�uvremenu su do�le vesti, odnosno izjava �efa kampanje DOS-a Zorana �in�i�a da se ova grupacija udaljila od ideje o nestrana�koj poslani�koj listi u Crnoj Gori zbog najava vlasti te Republike da �e voditi "�estoku antiizbornu kampanju". Izborna tenzija polako raste uprkos tome �to se komplikacije ne smanjuju. No, ovo je utakmica sa mnogo obrta. Do kraja nedelje o�ekuje se ulazak SPO-a u arenu saveznih parlamentarnih izbora.
To ne miri�e na racionalnu odluku. Ipak, jedna �injenica okre�e vetar u le�a opozicije – popularnost Ko�tunice kao predsedni�kog kandidata vidljiva je u anketama, u kontaktima aktivista koji od vrata do vrata skupljaju potpise za predsedni�ku kandidaturu, pa i na gradskim trgovima. U Beogradu se u pro�lu subotu na obi�an poziv gra�anstvu da do�e i uzme opozicionu programsku platformu okupilo oko 30.000 ljudi, a pred stolovima na kojima su davani potpisi za kandidaturu bila je neobi�no velika gu�va.
Milan Milo�evi�
Predsedni�ka lista
Slobodan Milo�evi� – 23 odsto bira�a
Poznat i tra�en
Vojislav Ko�tunica – 35 odsto bira�a
Vojislav Ko�tunica je ro�en 1944. godine u Beogradu. Zavr�io je Pravni fakultet u Beogradu 1966. Na Pravnom fakultetu je 1970. magistrirao s tezom "Politi�ka teorija i praksa ustavnog sudstva u Jugoslaviji" i doktorirao 1974. godine sa tezom "Institucionalizovana opozicija u politi�kom sistemu kapitalizma". Asistent na Pravnom fakultetu bio je 1970-74. Godine 1974, u vreme politi�kih progona na Univerzitetu, isklju�en je iz nastave zbog podr�ke profesoru Mihajlu �uri�u, koji je kritikovao ustavna re�enja iz 1974. Morao je da napusti fakultet. Znatno kasnije, 1989. godine, odbio je ponudu da se kao profesor vrati na fakultet sa koga je bio izba�en. Od 1974. radi u Institutu dru�tvenih nauka, a od 1981. u Institutu za filozofiju i dru�tvenu teoriju kao vi�i nau�ni saradnik i jedno vreme njegov direktor. Objavljuje radove iz oblasti ustavnog prava, politi�ke teorije i politi�ke filozofije. Autor knjiga "Politi�ki sistem kapitalizma i opozicija", "Strana�ki pluralizam ili monizam" (sa Kostom �avo�kim). Bio je �lan redakcije ili glavni i odgovorni urednik vi�e uglednih pravnih i filozofskih �asopisa kao �to su Arhiv za pravne i dru�tvene nauke, Filozofske studije, Filozofija i dru�tvo, Theoria. �lan je Srpskog PEN centra. Osamdesetih godina anga�uje se u za�titi ljudskih prava, posebno u Odboru za odbranu slobode misli i izra�avanja. Godine 1989. jedan je od osniva�a Demokratske stranke. Predsednik je Demokratske stranke Srbije od njenog osnivanja 1992. godine. Narodni poslanik u Skup�tini Srbije bio je od 1990. godine do 1997. godine.
Tomislav Nikoli� – pet odsto
Tomislav Nikoli� ro�en je 15. februara 1952. godine u Kragujevcu, gde se �kolovao i zavr�io Tehni�ku �kolu, gra�evinski smer. U mladosti se bavio atletikom. U tom gradu je studirao Pravni fakultet, ali je �kolovanje prekinuo i 1971. godine po�eo da radi kao �ef gradili�ta na pruzi Beograd-Bar. Nakon toga radio je u Majdanpeku, Beogradu i drugim mestima. Godine 1978. je postao �ef odseka za investicije i odr�avanje Komunalnog preduze�a u Kragujevcu. Nikoli� je prvo bio �lan Narodne radikalne stranke. Na njegovu inicijativu do�lo je do ujedinjenja jedne frakcije te stranke i mesnih odbora Srpskog �etni�kog pokreta Vojislava �e�elja i stvaranja nove partije pod nazivom Srpska radikalna stranka (SRS). Do izbora za saveznog poslanika u Ve�u gra�ana 1992. godine, nalazio se na mestu tehni�kog direktora Komunalnog preduze�a u Kragujevcu. Nakon republi�kih parlamentarnih izbora, u decembru te godine, postao je �ef poslani�ke grupe Srpske radikalne stranke u Skup�tini Srbije.
Vojislav Mihailovi� – pet odsto
Vojislav Mihailovi� ro�en je 3. septembra 1951. godine u Beogradu. U vreme njegovog ro�enja otac mu je, kao informbiroovac, bio na Golom otoku. Prvi put ga je video kada je imao dve godine. Vojislav je unuk �enerala Dragoljuba Mihailovi�a. Ime je dobio po stricu koji je poginuo kao �etnik negde kod Fo�e 1943. O�enjen je, ima dve k�eri, Isidoru (13) i Evu (9). Diplomirao na Pravnom fakultetu u Beogradu 1980. godine. Radio kao komercijalista u izdava�koj ku�i "Slovo ljubve", potom bio advokat, pa pre�ao u privatni biznis – suvlasnik je firme koja prodaje "Pampers" pelene. Od kraja 1993. godine po�eo da se bavi politikom kada je odre�en za nosioca izborne liste Deposa u Kragujevcu. Izabran je za poslanika, a potom (11. februara 1994) i za potpredsednika Skup�tine Srbije (biran ponovo i u sazivu skup�tine posle izbora 1997). �lan Predsedni�tva SPO-a od 1994. Na izborima '97. bio nosilac liste SPO-a na �ukarici; 22. januara 1999. izabran je za gradona�elnika Beograda.
Izborni slogani stranaka 1990–1997
1990
SPS: "Sa nama nema neizvesnosti"
DS: "Vreme je, prelomite pametno"
SPO: "Snaga, pobeda, obnova"; "Sutra po�inje odmah"
1992
SPS: "Srbija se saginjati ne�e"
SRS: "Gde su srpske zemlje tu su srpski radikali"; televizijski spot SRS-a za izbore 1992. godine bila je pesma "Mar� na Drinu"
DS: "Vratiti osmeh Srbiji"; "Mo�emo, ho�emo bolje"
SPO: "Sa nama nema sankcija"
GSS: "Pobedimo u miru, gra�anska svest, gra�anska savest"
1993
SPS: "Tako treba"; "Kad bolje razmislimo, svi smo mi pomalo socijalisti"
SRS: "Mi se nismo promenili"; "Mi dolazimo"
DS: "Po�teno"
DSS: "Zrelo je"
Depos: "Ima �anse, ima, ima"; "Depos daje re�"; "Glas nade"; "Da �ivimo kao sav normalan svet"; "I ovo je Srbija"
1996
SPS: "Idemo dalje"
SRS: "Vreme je"; "Izaberimo najbolje"
JUL: "Lepo, lep�e, levo"; "Glasaj za sebe"; "JUL je kul"; "Kevo, ja �u levo"
ND: "Evo ruke"; "Zbogom oru�je"; "Da ne bere onaj koji ne sadi"
DSS: "Verni vama, verni istini, verni sebi"
Koalicija "Zajedno": "Zajedno"
1997
SPS: "�to jes jes, najbolji je SPS"; "Za Srbiju"; "Promene"; "Za bolji �ivot, budu�nost Srbije"
JUL: "Jedinstvo razli�itosti"
ND: "Za Srbiju u plusu"; "Za Srbiju na Zapadu"; "Srbiju Srbijancima"; "Selo bez poreza do kraja veka"
SPO: "Srbijo iza�i"; "Sve za Srbiju"; "Ljubav, vera, nada"
SRS: "Mi dolazimo"
Antiizborna kampanja bojkota�a:
DS: "Budi hrabar reci dosta"; "Ajmo, ajde svi u bojkot"; "Bojkotujmo ove da dobijemo nove"
DSS: "Bojkot moj izbor"; "Znam za jadac"
GSS: "Nepo�teni izbori lopovska vlast"
DHSS: "Ujedinjeni na izborima, ujedinjeni u bojkotu"
2000
SPS: "Obnova, razvoj, reforma"; "Idemo dalje, u nove pobede"; "Uvek kad vam treba mi smo tu"; "Ugovor s narodom"
JUL: "Istina"; "Reforme"
SRS: "Mudrost, hrabrost, poverenje, pamet, znanje, po�tenje"; "Danas Zemun, sutra Srbija"; "Mi dolazimo – SRS"; "Radikali, snaga naroda"; "Svoj na svome"; "Uvek uz svoj narod"
SPO: "Vojislav Mihailovi�, na� �ovek"; "Vojislav Mihailovi�, �ovek pomirenja"
DOS: "Jedinstvo, pobeda, promene"; "Li�na skromnost i po�tenje"; "Briga za dr�avu i naciju"; "Vojislav Ko�tunica, �ovek iz kom�iluka"
Otpor: "Narod je otpor"; "Otpor, jer volim Srbiju"; "�iri se"; "Gotov je"; "Otpor do pobede"; "Nas je vi�e"
GSS: "Slo�no"
Savez za promene: "Na�a obaveza bolja Srbija"
predhodni sadr�aj naredni
Ko�tunica na prkosima
Uzimanje mere
Predsedni�ki kandidat Demokratske opozicije Vojislav Ko�tunica mogao bi u drugom krugu da pobedi Slobodana Milo�evi�a �ak sa 47:27. To je raspolo�enje javnog mnjenja. To, me�utim, jo� nije izborni rezultat
Kada je 4. avgusta 2000. Demokratska opozicija odlu�ila da kandiduje Vojislava Ko�tunicu za predsedni�ke izbore, bilo je odlu�eno da se sa objavljivanjem te �injenice sa�eka tri dana kako se ne bi prejudicirale o�ekivane odluke Srpskog pokreta obnove i crnogorskih partija. Me�utim, kako su se uhvatili za kvaku, pojedini opozicioni lideri su se raspri�ali pred novinarima. Neboj�a �ovi� iza�av�i iz sale odmeri pogledom Dragana Veselinova okru�enog kasetofonima i dobaci: "Vidi se da nisu bio u SPS-u! Disciplina, disciplina!" Opoziciona stvar – i dogovori i sva�e – nekako su javna stvar, i tu se tajne te�ko �uvaju a informacije lako cure, �to je mo�da dobro, a mo�e biti i �tetno.
Tako je i ovih dana procurelo da je Centar za politikolo�ka istra�ivanja i javno mnjenje Instituta dru�tvenih nauka radio jedno "istra�ivanje za naru�ioca", o kome nije obave�tavao javnost. Po tom, avgustovskom, istra�ivanju za predsedni�kog kandidata Demokratske opozicije Srbije Vojislava Ko�tunicu glasalo bi 35 odsto bira�a, za Slobodana Milo�evi�a 23 odsto, a za Vojislava Mihajlovi�a i Tomislava Nikoli�a po pet odsto. Vest je objavio B2-92, verovatno na osnovu opozicionog izvora. Po tom istra�ivanju ostali kandidati bi sakupili tri odsto glasova, a 29 odsto je zbir neodlu�nih i onih koji ne bi iza�li na izbore. Potom je procurelo jo� nekoliko detalja iz kojih proizilazi da bi, sude�i po trenutnom raspolo�enju javnog mnjenja merenog na uzorku od 1700 gra�ana na teritoriji Srbije bez Kosova, Ko�tunica u drugom krugu pobedio Slobodana Milo�evi�a �ak sa 47:27.
Neodlu�ni glasa�i i izborni apstinenti bi u tom slu�aju �inili zbir od 26 odsto. Ovo istra�ivanje je ra�eno u avgustu, po objavljivanju imena klju�nih predsedni�kih kandidata...
Rezultati su zanimljivi utoliko �to je ranije istra�ivanje CPIJM-a, obavljeno 11-15. jula 2000, pokazivalo da bi Vojislav Ko�tunica kao jedinstveni kandidat opozicije mogao da dobije 42 odsto bira�kog tela, a za Slobodana Milo�evi�a bi glasalo 28 odsto bira�a. To zna�i da je pojava vi�e kandidata "o�tetila" Ko�tunicu za sedam, a Milo�evi�a za pet odsto glasova.
Iz nekih razloga produbljuje se javna podr�ka Ko�tunici (slogan njegovog DSS-a: "Prkos, lekovito bilje protiv tiranije"). Uspon Ko�tunice na rang ozbiljnog pretendenta trebalo bi tek da bude predmet obja�njenja. Jedan iskusan politikolog samo, ne bez uzbu�enja, konstatuje: "De�ava se ne�to vrlo interesantno..." U pro�logodi�njim anketama je eks-guverner Dragoslav Avramovi� bio politi�ar koji bi nai�ao na najmanji otpor – samo 21 odsto anketiranih izja�njavalo se o njemu negativno, o Ko�tunici se samo 29 odsto gra�ana izra�avalo negativno, o Milo�evi�u 56, o Dra�kovi�u 52, o �in�i�u 57, a o �e�elju 64 odsto.
Gotovo �itavu godinu dana razli�ite istra�iva�ke agencije bele�e ina�e rast opozicionog raspolo�enja. Interesantno je i to da se ve� nekoliko meseci istra�ivanja razli�itih agencija u osnovi sla�u i kad je u pitanju rejting politi�ara i izborna sklonost bira�a.
U pro�li ponedeljak direktor agencije "Medijum" Srbobran Brankovi� kao gost Pres kluba konstatovao je, na primer, da istra�ivanja javnog mnjenja nekoliko relevantnih agencija pokazuju da bi na izborima za predsednika SRJ za Vojislava Ko�tunicu glasalo 30 odsto bira�a, za Slobodana Milo�evi�a 25, za Tomislava Nikoli�a 10 do 15, a za Vojislava Mihailovi�a od osam do deset odsto bira�a u Srbiji.
Ti procenti nisu identi�ni onima koji se vezuju uz rezultate CPIJM-a ali u osnovi govore isto – o znatnoj prednosti Vojislava Ko�tunice.
LJUTNJA: Naravno, bilo je odmah "ljutnji na ogledalo". SPO je najglasnije vrisnuo zbog toga �to se predsedni�ki kandidat Vojislav Mihailovi� nisko kotira. Zoran Lutovac je recimo pre dve nedelje izneo podatak iz anketa CPIJM-a ra�enih u januaru u kojima se vidi da Vojislav Mihailovi�, tada nenominovani kandidat SPO-a, ima podr�ku 12 odsto bira�a, od toga samo pet odsto �vrste podr�ke. Nova istra�ivanja, posle "pu�tanja predsedni�ke trke", pokazuju prili�no veliko slaganje sa tim prethodnim sonda�ama – g. Mihailovi� je u trenutku kandidovanja dobio ta�nu informaciju o svojoj startnoj poziciji.
Utoliko gore po sonda�e! Portparol SPO-a Ivan Kova�evi� izjavljuje da je Mihailovi�ev protivnik u DOS-u odre�en po sistemu "rekla mi jedna baba", �ak je i predsednik Gradskog odbora SPO-a statisti�ar Miladin Kova�evi� optu�io DOS da preko dnevne �tampe plasira neistine o rejtingu predsedni�kog kandidata Vojislava Mihailovi�a, da se radi o la�nim anketama jer, prema njegovim re�ima, rezultati istra�ivanja koje sprovodi SPO govore o prednosti Mihailovi�a u odnosu na ostale predsedni�ke kandidate, te da u op�tini Zemun i Stari grad predsedni�ki kandidat SPO-a nadmo�no vodi u odnosu na ostale pretendente. Ni drugi politi�ki akteri nisu ostali ravnodu�ni. Vojislav �e�elj je u jednom TV intervjuu tvrdio da nijedna agencija do sada nije pogodila izbore, �to nije ta�no – Centar za politikolo�ka istra�ivanja i javno mnjenje, ve� pominjani CPIJM, pogodio je vi�e puta izborni rezultat, rang pojedinih stranaka i predsedni�kih kandidata. Dodu�e, nisu mogli da pogode ta�an procenat radikalskih pristalica, ali su poga�ali i njihov izborni rang. Ka istra�iva�ima javnog mnjenja usledili su i diskvalifikatorski napadi u dr�avnim medijima.
"RAZMI�LJANJE O POVLA�ENJU": To mora biti znak da mo�da ima ne�eg �to nije samo politi�ko agitovanje u onome �to je pro�le nedelje saop�tila �ovi�eva Demokratska alternativa, koja tvrdi da je iz izvora bliskih Jugoslovenskoj levici saznala da je Socijalisti�ka partija Srbije organizovala veliko istra�ivanje raspolo�enja bira�a u Beogradu, prema kojem je, od 3000 gra�ana, 60 odsto odgovorilo da �e glas dati Demokratskoj opoziciji Srbije, a samo 25 odsto da �e na izborima zaokru�iti levicu. Demokratska alternativa �ak tvrdi da predsednik SRJ Slobodan Milo�evi� "ozbiljno razmi�lja da povu�e kandidaturu" za �efa dr�ave, ali da se s tim "ne sla�e njegova supruga", te da je pro�log petka, kada su analizirani rezultati istra�ivanja, zaklju�eno da je jedina mogu�nost da se izbegne totalni izborni fijasko razbijanje Demokratske opozicije Srbije.
Srbobran Brankovi�, me�utim, naslu�uje da bi se moglo o�ekivati da radikali u poslednjem trenutku povuku kandidaturu Tomislava Nikoli�a da bi koncentrisali glasove oko Slobodana Milo�evi�a. Za sada je predsednik Predsedni�tva Stranke srpskog jedinstva Borislav Pelevi� saop�tio da ne prihvata kandidaturu za predsednika SRJ, pristalice svoje stranke pozvao je da glasaju za kandidata SPS-a ili SRS-a.
Nervozi SPO-a mo�da doprinosi i pritisak koji se vr�i na njihovog predsedni�kog kandidata iz opozicionih redova i iz redova SPO-a da razmisli o povla�enju (vidi tekst "Vesela kampanja", str.10).
Raspolo�enje javnog mnjenja jo� nije izborna odluka. Bi�e mnogo faktora u igri, spoljnih i unutra�njih. Srbobran Brankovi� procenjuje da bi se, kad bi ishod izbora zavisio samo od politi�kog raspolo�enja, mo�da �ak mogla o�ekivati pobeda opozicije u prvom krugu. Rezultati, me�utim, ne�e zavisiti samo od toga, jer ukoliko crnogorske partije budu bojkotovale izbore, zna se da bi to vladaju�im strankama donelo 30 poslani�kih mesta u Ve�u gra�ana i 20 poslanika u Ve�u republika. Uz to, lokalni izbori sa dve opozicione liste mogu se smatrati izgubljenim, sa odrazom na pona�anje bira�a u drugom krugu predsedni�kih izbora.
GEOMETRIJA: Matemati�ar Lav Ivanovi�, profesor univerziteta, saradnik CESID-a, u Pres klubu 21. avgusta upozorava na ne�to o �emu izborne studije govore – kada vladaju�e partije imaju preko 25 odsto bira�a koji glasaju za njih, to im daje mogu�nost da izbornom geometrijom i pode�avanjem izbornih uslova udese da dobiju ve�inu. Lav Ivanovi� konstatuje da vladaju�e partije to rade stru�no. Verovatno je da �e vladaju�e stranke profitirati na tome �to su kosovske izborne jedinice priklju�ene izbornim jedinicama Prokuplje i Vranje. Na tim izbornim jedinicama bi�e veoma te�ko kontrolisati glasanje. Tome doprinosi i dosad nepoznata odredba da glasa�, ako doka�e da nije u mogu�nosti da glasa na bira�kom mestu na kome je upisan, mo�e to u�initi na bilo kom mestu. Niko ne zna kako �e se ti listi�i kontrolisati, jer su sada�nje odredbe nejasne. Sam broj od oko 250.000 "kosovskih glasova" ne mora da bude presudan u predsedni�kim izborima, pa �ak ni na izborima za Ve�e republika u kojima je jedna republika jedna izborna jedinica, ali na izborima za Ve�e gra�ana bi�e va�ni.
�to se Crne Gore ti�e, tu re�im koristi jednostavnu, ve� uhodanu tehniku: gde postoji politi�ki spor radi na tome da bira�i ne iza�u na birali�te, konstatuje Ivanovi�. U me�uvremenu su do�le vesti, odnosno izjava �efa kampanje DOS-a Zorana �in�i�a da se ova grupacija udaljila od ideje o nestrana�koj poslani�koj listi u Crnoj Gori zbog najava vlasti te Republike da �e voditi "�estoku antiizbornu kampanju". Izborna tenzija polako raste uprkos tome �to se komplikacije ne smanjuju. No, ovo je utakmica sa mnogo obrta. Do kraja nedelje o�ekuje se ulazak SPO-a u arenu saveznih parlamentarnih izbora.
To ne miri�e na racionalnu odluku. Ipak, jedna �injenica okre�e vetar u le�a opozicije – popularnost Ko�tunice kao predsedni�kog kandidata vidljiva je u anketama, u kontaktima aktivista koji od vrata do vrata skupljaju potpise za predsedni�ku kandidaturu, pa i na gradskim trgovima. U Beogradu se u pro�lu subotu na obi�an poziv gra�anstvu da do�e i uzme opozicionu programsku platformu okupilo oko 30.000 ljudi, a pred stolovima na kojima su davani potpisi za kandidaturu bila je neobi�no velika gu�va.
Milan Milo�evi�
Predsedni�ka lista
Slobodan Milo�evi� – 23 odsto bira�a
Poznat i tra�en
Vojislav Ko�tunica – 35 odsto bira�a
Vojislav Ko�tunica je ro�en 1944. godine u Beogradu. Zavr�io je Pravni fakultet u Beogradu 1966. Na Pravnom fakultetu je 1970. magistrirao s tezom "Politi�ka teorija i praksa ustavnog sudstva u Jugoslaviji" i doktorirao 1974. godine sa tezom "Institucionalizovana opozicija u politi�kom sistemu kapitalizma". Asistent na Pravnom fakultetu bio je 1970-74. Godine 1974, u vreme politi�kih progona na Univerzitetu, isklju�en je iz nastave zbog podr�ke profesoru Mihajlu �uri�u, koji je kritikovao ustavna re�enja iz 1974. Morao je da napusti fakultet. Znatno kasnije, 1989. godine, odbio je ponudu da se kao profesor vrati na fakultet sa koga je bio izba�en. Od 1974. radi u Institutu dru�tvenih nauka, a od 1981. u Institutu za filozofiju i dru�tvenu teoriju kao vi�i nau�ni saradnik i jedno vreme njegov direktor. Objavljuje radove iz oblasti ustavnog prava, politi�ke teorije i politi�ke filozofije. Autor knjiga "Politi�ki sistem kapitalizma i opozicija", "Strana�ki pluralizam ili monizam" (sa Kostom �avo�kim). Bio je �lan redakcije ili glavni i odgovorni urednik vi�e uglednih pravnih i filozofskih �asopisa kao �to su Arhiv za pravne i dru�tvene nauke, Filozofske studije, Filozofija i dru�tvo, Theoria. �lan je Srpskog PEN centra. Osamdesetih godina anga�uje se u za�titi ljudskih prava, posebno u Odboru za odbranu slobode misli i izra�avanja. Godine 1989. jedan je od osniva�a Demokratske stranke. Predsednik je Demokratske stranke Srbije od njenog osnivanja 1992. godine. Narodni poslanik u Skup�tini Srbije bio je od 1990. godine do 1997. godine.
Tomislav Nikoli� – pet odsto
Tomislav Nikoli� ro�en je 15. februara 1952. godine u Kragujevcu, gde se �kolovao i zavr�io Tehni�ku �kolu, gra�evinski smer. U mladosti se bavio atletikom. U tom gradu je studirao Pravni fakultet, ali je �kolovanje prekinuo i 1971. godine po�eo da radi kao �ef gradili�ta na pruzi Beograd-Bar. Nakon toga radio je u Majdanpeku, Beogradu i drugim mestima. Godine 1978. je postao �ef odseka za investicije i odr�avanje Komunalnog preduze�a u Kragujevcu. Nikoli� je prvo bio �lan Narodne radikalne stranke. Na njegovu inicijativu do�lo je do ujedinjenja jedne frakcije te stranke i mesnih odbora Srpskog �etni�kog pokreta Vojislava �e�elja i stvaranja nove partije pod nazivom Srpska radikalna stranka (SRS). Do izbora za saveznog poslanika u Ve�u gra�ana 1992. godine, nalazio se na mestu tehni�kog direktora Komunalnog preduze�a u Kragujevcu. Nakon republi�kih parlamentarnih izbora, u decembru te godine, postao je �ef poslani�ke grupe Srpske radikalne stranke u Skup�tini Srbije.
Vojislav Mihailovi� – pet odsto
Vojislav Mihailovi� ro�en je 3. septembra 1951. godine u Beogradu. U vreme njegovog ro�enja otac mu je, kao informbiroovac, bio na Golom otoku. Prvi put ga je video kada je imao dve godine. Vojislav je unuk �enerala Dragoljuba Mihailovi�a. Ime je dobio po stricu koji je poginuo kao �etnik negde kod Fo�e 1943. O�enjen je, ima dve k�eri, Isidoru (13) i Evu (9). Diplomirao na Pravnom fakultetu u Beogradu 1980. godine. Radio kao komercijalista u izdava�koj ku�i "Slovo ljubve", potom bio advokat, pa pre�ao u privatni biznis – suvlasnik je firme koja prodaje "Pampers" pelene. Od kraja 1993. godine po�eo da se bavi politikom kada je odre�en za nosioca izborne liste Deposa u Kragujevcu. Izabran je za poslanika, a potom (11. februara 1994) i za potpredsednika Skup�tine Srbije (biran ponovo i u sazivu skup�tine posle izbora 1997). �lan Predsedni�tva SPO-a od 1994. Na izborima '97. bio nosilac liste SPO-a na �ukarici; 22. januara 1999. izabran je za gradona�elnika Beograda.
Izborni slogani stranaka 1990–1997
1990
SPS: "Sa nama nema neizvesnosti"
DS: "Vreme je, prelomite pametno"
SPO: "Snaga, pobeda, obnova"; "Sutra po�inje odmah"
1992
SPS: "Srbija se saginjati ne�e"
SRS: "Gde su srpske zemlje tu su srpski radikali"; televizijski spot SRS-a za izbore 1992. godine bila je pesma "Mar� na Drinu"
DS: "Vratiti osmeh Srbiji"; "Mo�emo, ho�emo bolje"
SPO: "Sa nama nema sankcija"
GSS: "Pobedimo u miru, gra�anska svest, gra�anska savest"
1993
SPS: "Tako treba"; "Kad bolje razmislimo, svi smo mi pomalo socijalisti"
SRS: "Mi se nismo promenili"; "Mi dolazimo"
DS: "Po�teno"
DSS: "Zrelo je"
Depos: "Ima �anse, ima, ima"; "Depos daje re�"; "Glas nade"; "Da �ivimo kao sav normalan svet"; "I ovo je Srbija"
1996
SPS: "Idemo dalje"
SRS: "Vreme je"; "Izaberimo najbolje"
JUL: "Lepo, lep�e, levo"; "Glasaj za sebe"; "JUL je kul"; "Kevo, ja �u levo"
ND: "Evo ruke"; "Zbogom oru�je"; "Da ne bere onaj koji ne sadi"
DSS: "Verni vama, verni istini, verni sebi"
Koalicija "Zajedno": "Zajedno"
1997
SPS: "�to jes jes, najbolji je SPS"; "Za Srbiju"; "Promene"; "Za bolji �ivot, budu�nost Srbije"
JUL: "Jedinstvo razli�itosti"
ND: "Za Srbiju u plusu"; "Za Srbiju na Zapadu"; "Srbiju Srbijancima"; "Selo bez poreza do kraja veka"
SPO: "Srbijo iza�i"; "Sve za Srbiju"; "Ljubav, vera, nada"
SRS: "Mi dolazimo"
Antiizborna kampanja bojkota�a:
DS: "Budi hrabar reci dosta"; "Ajmo, ajde svi u bojkot"; "Bojkotujmo ove da dobijemo nove"
DSS: "Bojkot moj izbor"; "Znam za jadac"
GSS: "Nepo�teni izbori lopovska vlast"
DHSS: "Ujedinjeni na izborima, ujedinjeni u bojkotu"
2000
SPS: "Obnova, razvoj, reforma"; "Idemo dalje, u nove pobede"; "Uvek kad vam treba mi smo tu"; "Ugovor s narodom"
JUL: "Istina"; "Reforme"
SRS: "Mudrost, hrabrost, poverenje, pamet, znanje, po�tenje"; "Danas Zemun, sutra Srbija"; "Mi dolazimo – SRS"; "Radikali, snaga naroda"; "Svoj na svome"; "Uvek uz svoj narod"
SPO: "Vojislav Mihailovi�, na� �ovek"; "Vojislav Mihailovi�, �ovek pomirenja"
DOS: "Jedinstvo, pobeda, promene"; "Li�na skromnost i po�tenje"; "Briga za dr�avu i naciju"; "Vojislav Ko�tunica, �ovek iz kom�iluka"
Otpor: "Narod je otpor"; "Otpor, jer volim Srbiju"; "�iri se"; "Gotov je"; "Otpor do pobede"; "Nas je vi�e"
GSS: "Slo�no"
Savez za promene: "Na�a obaveza bolja Srbija"
predhodni sadr�aj naredni
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
