SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH ASSERTS ITSELF IN SERBIAN POLITICS

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 BELGRADE 000217 SENSITIVE SIPDIS E.O. 12958: N/A TAGS: KIRF PHUM PGOV PREL SR KV SUBJECT: SERBIAN ORTHODOX CHURCH ASSERTS ITSELF IN SERBIAN POLITICS REFS: A) 08 BELGRADE 1123, B) 08 BELGRADE 1217, C) BELGRADE 138, D) 08 BELGRADE 1026 Summary -------------- ¶1. (SBU) With the May session of the Holy Assembly of Bishops of the Serbian Orthodox Church (SOC) approaching, 94 year-old Patriarch Pavle remains hospitalized and incapacitated. As during the November session, debate about Pavle's succession, and perhaps another movement to unseat him, likely will feature prominently in May. The battle for positioning has begun in earnest with competing SOC leaders directly inserting the Church into public discourse on political hot-button issues such as the draft Vojvodina statute and draft anti-discrimination law. Civil society and some government officials criticized the Church's new assertiveness in the political area, warning that blurring the divide between church and state was a slippery slope. Church officials argue back that they have a right to voice their opinions and play a role in public debates. End Summary. Pavle Head of Church in Name Only -------------- ¶2. (U) Although he has been hospitalized since November 2007 at the Military Medical Academy in Belgrade, Patriarch Pavle still enjoys enormous respect among the Serbian public. In its list of the 300 most powerful individuals in Serbia published on March 9, the daily "Blic" awarded the Patriarch the 10th spot, sandwiched between the National Bank Governor and the U.S. Ambassador. ¶3. (SBU) During its November session, the Holy Assembly of Bishops, or Sabor, considered a request allegedly submitted by Patriarch Pavle to be relieved of his duties (Ref A),but a majority of the 45 bishops present voted to have Pavle fulfill his lifetime appointment. The Patriarch reportedly accepted this decision "with tranquility" and agreed to remain head of the Church (Ref B),with the four-person Holy Synod headed by Metropolitan Amfilohije of Montenegro and the Coastlands continuing to run the SOC on a day-to-day basis. SOC Criticizes Vojvodina Statute -------------- ¶4. (U) On February 6, the Holy Synod addressed a letter to Parliament Speaker Slavica Djukic-Dejanovic (copied to President Tadic and Prime Minister Cvetkovic) in which it expressed strong opposition to the draft Statute for the Autonomous Province of Vojvodina awaiting parliamentary approval (Refs C and D). The letter stressed that the statute would undermine Serbia's sovereignty and territorial integrity, buzz words typically used to describe the threat of secession. ¶5. (SBU) Echoing nationalist rhetoric espoused by the Democratic Party of Serbia (DSS) of former Prime Minister Vojislav Kostunica, the Holy Synod declared that the statute would create another "state within a state" and thereby continue the "dismembering of Serbia" that began with the "violent seizure and occupation" of Kosovo. (Comment: We believe that Amfilohije was the driving force behind the letter given his known opposition to autonomy and his predominant role in the Synod. End comment.) Church Blocks Anti-Discrimination Law -------------- ¶6. (SBU) Bishop Irinej of Backa, frequently described as the chief rival to Amfilohije for succession to the Patriarchate, made news on March 4 when he allegedly directly intervened with the president's office to have a draft anti-discrimination law withdrawn from parliamentary procedure just hours before a scheduled debate. The draft, which had been approved by the government and the relevant parliamentary committee following six months of public comment, had also received a positive review from the Council of Europe Venice Commission. Nonetheless, the church led the charge to delay adoption of the law which is required for Serbia to gain Schengen White List status. ¶7. (SBU) In a meeting with us on March 9, Metropolitan Amfilohije said that he had signed a letter, later resubmitted with the signatures of representatives of Serbia's seven "traditional" religious communities, which called for amendments to a number of articles of the law. The letter questioned 13 articles, most importantly the deletion of articles providing freedom to change religious beliefs and prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation. Irinej told "Vecernje Novosti" on March 11 that the draft law would provide Serbian citizens with rights which are not guaranteed by international law and that his proposals therefore sought to bring the law into accordance with EU and Council of Europe standards. ¶8. (SBU) Amfilohije clarified to us that he felt the Dutch BELGRADE 00000217 002 OF 002 anti-discrimination law, on which the Serbian law allegedly had been based was far too liberal for Serbia and that other European models would be more suitable for Serbian society. He used as an example varying European standards for the definition of "legal age," and said some European countries even considered 12 years old legal, which was something Serbia could never accept. "The Communists silenced us for almost 50 years," Amfilohije argued, "but the church has a moral view on issues and our voice will be heard." In response to our comments that the church's intervention was giving the church a bad name in international circles, Amfilohije said he was confident a compromise could be found and added that all of Serbia's traditional religious groups shared his view. ¶9. (U) Civil society representatives and many government officials reacted swiftly to this development. Director of the Belgrade Center for Human Rights Vojin Dimitrijevic told the press that the move damaged Serbia's image by demonstrating that the government would accord preferential treatment to the SOC and other "traditional" religious groups. Miodrag Zivanovic, head of the "non-traditional" Christian Adventist Church, issued a public letter challenging the government to ensure that its laws guaranteed the rights of all, not a select few. ¶10. (SBU) Ministry for Human and Minority Rights State Secretary Marko Karadzic announced that "Serbia is a secular state, and no church should be able to influence the adoption of a law," arguing that the proposed changes essentially would turn the draft into a law promoting discrimination. Minister for Labor and Social Policy Rasim Ljajic rhetorically asked whether he should consult religious communities before proposing pieces of legislation, and told us privately that he did not have support within the government for resisting changes to the draft. ¶11. (U) Minister of Diaspora Srdjan Sreckovic, while emphasizing the need for separation of church and state, expressed approval for the government's willingness to seek consensus since "religious communities should have influence on public life." Dragan Markovic, head of the United Serbia party that participates in the ruling coalition, said that his party would not support the draft without amendments, adding "I have nothing against homosexuals and what they do. Their rights do not bother me. To me it is an illness. I have nothing against those people personally, but as a member of parliament I cannot vote for something that is sick." He concluded that "if homosexuals have to lead Serbia to Europe, then it is better that we stay here and look after sheep in Serbia." ¶12. (SBU) The unusual circumstances surrounding the government reversal led the press to allege a quid-pro-quo agreement between Bishop Irinej and President Tadic. Citing unnamed high-ranking government officials, daily "Blic" reported on March 9 that President Tadic had agreed to withdraw the draft law in order to strengthen Irinej vis-a-vis Amfilohije in hopes that Irinej would provide traction within the SOC for the President's pro-European policies. Comment -------------- ¶13. (SBU) Patriarch Pavle's prolonged illness has created a power vacuum in the Serbian Orthodox Church, with church officials trying to assert themselves but lacking the power of the Patriarch's bully-pulpit. Replacing Patriarch Pavle before he is deceased would create problems for his successor, but the status quo allows various bishops to jockey for position and creates disunity in the church. This vacuum demonstrates the need for the church, when a new Patriarch is chosen, to take a serious look at its practices to better adapt to its post-Communist role. End Comment. MUNTER