SERBIA CONTINUES TO DELAY ADOPTION OF VOJVODINA STATUTE

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 02 BELGRADE 000276 DEPT FOR EUR/SCE (P. PETERSON) SENSITIVE SIPDIS E.O.12958: N/A TAGS: PGOV PREL PHUM SR SUBJECT: SERBIA CONTINUES TO DELAY ADOPTION OF VOJVODINA STATUTE REFS: A) Belgrade 138, B) 08 Belgrade 1026 Summary -------------- ¶1. (SBU) The Vojvodina Statute, the governing legislation for the Serbia's only remaining autonomous province (and one of the most prosperous parts of the country),remains off the National Assembly's agenda. The statute is foreseen in Serbia's Constitution, but nationalist groups continue to criticize the statute as a slippery slope to Vojvodina's secession from Serbia. While the Democratic Party (DS) has repeatedly promised to make minor changes and adopt the Statute "soon," continued delays in passing even the prerequisite legislation needed before the Statute is adopted call DS's intent into question. Vojvodina parties are concerned about possible changes to the Statute and whether it might remain in limbo due to differences between the DS in Vojvodina and national level officials in Belgrade. End Summary. Statute Still in Limbo -------------- ¶2. (SBU) Despite assurances from the government that it would complete work by mid-March on the Law of Vojvodina Competencies and amendments to the Vojvodina Statute, the governing legislation for the autonomous province (Ref A),progress has been slow. Democratic Party (DS) Vice President and Vojvodina Executive Council President Bojan Pajtic told us February 25 that the government would complete work on the Law on Competencies, a prerequisite for the Statute, within a week or two then send it to the National Assembly. Pajtic said that the Vojvodina Assembly would then need to change the Statute slightly to conform to the Constitution and the new law, and then send it to the National Assembly for confirmation. ¶3. (SBU) The Law on Competencies Working Group got off to a slow and confused start, but there appears to have been some progress recently. Media reported March 26 that the draft Law on Competencies had been delivered to Pajtic the day before. After meeting with Pajtic in Novi Sad on March 25, Economy Minister Mladjan Dinkic announced that the National Assembly would pass the Law on Competencies and confirm the Statute by the end of April. Pajtic told the Ambassador on the same day that the amendments were minor and the Statute as adopted by the Vojvodina Assembly had been purposely overly ambitious, because "if you do not raise expectations, then nothing will be done." Coalition Partners Frustrated -------------- ¶4. (SBU) DS's Vojvodina coalition partners have been speaking out against the continual delays and at being left out of whatever changes DS is making to the Statute. League of Vojvodina Social Democrats (LSV) leader Nenad Canak told us on February 28 that if DS changed even one word of the Statute, his party would not vote for it, since the Vojvodina version had already represented a compromise between the coalition partners. Both LSV Vice President Bojan Kostres Alliance of Vojvodina Hungarians (SVM) leader Istvan Pasztor have complained publicly about delays and rejected any attempt to change the text of the Statute. Privately, Pasztor told us February 26 he feared the changes would be essential rather than minor. The Hungarian Political Counselor told us March 18 that SVM had complained that the DS was not involving its coalition partners at all in discussions of the Statute. Conflict within DS? -------------- ¶5. (SBU) The many delays since the Vojvodina Assembly passed the Statute in October (Ref B) call into question whether the Statute will be on the National Assembly's agenda in the near future. Canak (LSV) told us he was not sure that President Tadic wanted the Statute to pass, because Tadic felt politically threatened by Pajtic, who is very popular in Vojvodina. Since Pajtic had staked his reputation in Vojvodina on passing a Statute with greater autonomy for the province, Tadic could bring him down by taking no action on it, according to Canak. Our contacts have told us that at the March 1 DS Main Board session, however, Tadic supported Pajtic on the Statute in the face of opposition from DS Vice President Dusan Petrovic and Foreign Minister Vuk Jeremic. Nationalist Rhetoric Continues -------------- ¶6. (SBU) Meanwhile opposition parties continue to claim that the Statute is separatist and attempt to link it to the loss of Kosovo. At a panel discussion on March 1, Democratic Party of Serbia (DSS) BELGRADE 00000276 002 OF 002 head Vojislav Kostunica accused the government of "giving up the state" by accepting the Ahtisaari Plan for Kosovo and adopting the Vojvodina Statute, which would lead to Vojvodina's secession. On the tenth anniversary of the start of the NATO intervention, the DSS hung a banner on a Novi Sad bridge reading "1999...bombs then, Statute now...2009!!! The end justifies the means." DSS spokesman Borko Ilic accused the government of bowing to international pressure to pass the Statute. Pajtic told us the attacks were baseless and said the issue would completely disappear a week after the National Assembly's confirmation of the Statute. No Secessionists in Vojvodina -------------- ¶7. (U) Despite nationalist rhetoric attempting to draw parallels between the two former Yugoslav "autonomous provinces," there are key differences between Vojvodina and Kosovo's histories and current political situations. Both Vojvodina and Kosovo were given the status of autonomous provinces of Serbia in the 1974 Yugoslav constitution and enjoyed far greater powers than those provided for by the Statute today, including seats in the Yugoslav Collective Presidency alongside the six constituent republics. While Vojvodina's autonomy, like Kosovo's, was rescinded by the 1989 Serbian constitution, Vojvodina had a different and less painful fate. During the late 1980s as Milosevic was moving to consolidate power, Belgrade-engineered protests in Vojvodina (the "Yogurt Revolution") focused on the "ineptitude" of the provincial politicians and bureaucrats and did not have an ethnic component that resulted in the tragedies in Kosovo. There was never violence in Vojvodina nor any question in the 1990s that Vojvodina was not part of Serbia. ¶8. (SBU) The ethnic composition of Vojvodina has created a much different political dynamic than in Kosovo. Before it joined the Kingdom of Serbia in 1918, Vojvodina was part of the Serbian Empire, the Kingdom of Hungary, the Austro-Hungarian Empire, and the Ottoman Empire, among others. Each ruler encouraged different ethnic groups to settle in the area. This history left Vojvodina with over two dozen ethnic groups today, but the province has long been predominantly ethnic Serb. (Experts estimate that the province currently has 1.5 million Serbs and only a couple of hundred thousand minorities.) Both the ethnic diversity and large ethnic Serb population have prevented identification of the province as a whole with any one country outside of Serbia. ¶9. (SBU) Today, no mainstream political group in Vojvodina calls for secession from Serbia or returning to a "motherland." LSV, the main proponent for increased Vojvodina autonomy, is not an ethnic party; it wants to return to the level of autonomy Vojvodina enjoyed from 1974-1988, which LSV argues helped all of Serbia prosper. LSV links the need for greater autonomy to a need for decentralization throughout Serbia. Officials from Vojvodina's Executive Council travelled around Serbia in January promoting Vojvodina autonomy as a first step in strengthening other regions of Serbia, an idea Pajtic said was gaining support. Comment -------------- ¶10. (SBU) Passage of the Statute is required by the 2006 Constitution and should have been fairly straightforward, but has instead been complicated by internal DS divisions. DS hypersensitivity about exposing itself to nationalist rhetoric has given ammunition to the ultra-nationalists by keeping the Statute in the public eye so long. While the issue has no direct impact on bilateral relations with the United States -- and it would be counterproductive for us to comment publicly -- greater autonomy for Vojvodina's institutions would allow them to manage the province more efficiently. I would also be an important step in Serbia's efforts to decentralize government, which is not only key for enhancing democracy and responsiveness to citizens but is also an important precondition for receiving EU structural funds. End Comment. MUNTER