DINKIC, DEMO BLOC MP'S ON NIKOLIC APPOINTMENT

C O N F I D E N T I A L BELGRADE 000620 SIPDIS SIPDIS E.O. 12958: DECL: 05/08/17 TAGS: PGOV PREL SR SUBJECT: DINKIC, DEMO BLOC MP'S ON NIKOLIC APPOINTMENT REF: BELGRADE 617 Classified by Ambassador Michael Polt, reasons 1.4 (b,d) ¶1. (c) Following conversations with President Tadic and PM Kostunica (reftel) regarding the appointment of Radical Party (SRS) deputy president Tomislav Nikolic as speaker of the Serbian parliament, the Ambassador spoke with G-17 Plus president Mladjan Dinkic to gauge next steps. Dinkic vowed that G-17 would not participate in the formation of parliamentary committees or attend further sessions while Nikolic remained speaker in protest of the vote. He further claimed that he had instructed five G-17 Plus State Secretary-level officials to resign their posts in government as a SIPDIS further protest (this would include, said Dinkic, Assistant Minister for Defense Policy Snezana Markovic and an (unnamed) Assistant Minister of Agriculture). ¶2. (c) Asked to elaborate on his categorical statement that G-17 would drop out of coalition talks if Nikolic was elected speaker, Dinkic clarified that G-17 would still be willing to join a DS-DSS coalition, but only if Nikolic was removed from his position (essentially a reversal, since Nikolic would stand little chance of staying in the post in the face of a parliamentary majority of DS, DSS, and G-17 Plus...unless one of those parties fought to keep him in - see below). Dinkic added that, in a new elections scenario, he would naturally join in a pre-election coalition with DS and LDP, noting that he had offered to merge G-17 Plus with DS many months ago, but Tadic had said this would only be possible after elections. ¶3. (c) Meanwhile, our contacts in the parliament are painting an increasingly chaotic picture of the mood. DS MP's tell us they will continue to insist on Nikolic being removed as part of any coalition deal - which some now concede would include giving Interior to DSS and allowing for, at a minimum, some sort of power-sharing arrangement in BIA - though there is still a strong current in DS, led by VP Dragan Sutanovac, that rejects any further concessions. At the same time, DSS MP's are telling us privately - and this echoes somewhat the conversation the Ambassador had with Kostunica reftel - that DSS is really looking to hammer out a coalition deal with DS while at the same time keeping Nikolic in the speaker position, ostensibly to force SRS as part of the government to share in responsibility for the loss of Kosovo. ¶4. (c) Overall, our DS contacts are intermittently confused or despondent, unsure in general where the party leadership intends to take them. DSS, for its part, has admitted to some dissention in the ranks, with more progressive elements disappointed at Kostunica's decision to support the Radicals. In fact, during the vote, at least one DSS MP reportedly broke down into tears, prompting DS VP Sutanovac to implore her to vote her conscience (a virtual impossibility, as the constitution says mandates belong to the party vice the MP, and a vote against party line on this issue would likely cost someone their position). The center-left, meanwhile, has by most accounts acquitted itself very well during the debate, putting up strong, persuasive arguments to which there was virtually no rebuttal. Nenad Canak "stole the show" when, cribbing from a nationally-famous quote by an inter-war MP, he told the assembly "God save us from Radical Patriotism and Kostunica's Legalism." ¶5. (c) Comment: Given Dinkic's prevarication and Tadic's entreaty to the Ambassador reftel to publicly support a coalition agreement, the likelihood of new elections is already receding - with a coalition attended by additional DS concessions a stronger possibility. Whether or not Nikolic stays on, but especially if he does, Tadic's acquiescence will likely deal a strong blow to his ability to lead the party in the long term. It will also erode voter support for DS in the next elections, which are likely by the end of the year and could include presidential, municipal, and parliamentary mandates. The "winners" would be LDP, which would collect defectors, and DSS, which would benefit disproportionately from DS voter dissatisfaction and attendant abstention. POLT