Republic of Macedonia
Republic of MacedoniaAt this period, the 10 Congress of the Communist Party (SKM), later SKM -- Party for Democratic Transformation, marked the Macedonian democratic spring. This party, under its latter name, came out at the first multiparty elections in the Republic of Macedonia, along with the favourable burden of the near past and the unfavourable burden of the long gone past times. In the fall of the Macedonian spring, the party claimed to the public it had "radically given up the communist and Bolshevik party model." Still carrying its unfavourable burden, this same party (today called Alliance of Democratic Forces in Macedonia -- SDSM), after its Eleventh Congress (April 20, 1991, as a "legitimate, legal and political heir of the Communist Party of Macedonia, i.e., the League of Communists in Macedonia -- Party for Democratic Transformation), despite its clear messages, is still in the race for power. This party had 220,759 votes at the November-December elections in 1990, or 20.38% of the total votes in Macedonia, thus gaining 31 seats in Parliament (the number would grant it only 28 seats today), taking the second place, closely following the 38 seats won by VMRO-DPMNE. It was exactly this party, in this period when other "goods" were obviously popular, dared promote in Macedonia the idea of Social-Democracy, not corresponding at all with the model of replacing the previous "working class" matrix with a "nationality" one. They preached social- democracy, civil concept of society, and a different approach to dealing with minority and human rights issues. This party went for "contemporary principles of social-democracy, based on economic and social efficiency and ethnic principles of European humanism, social justice and human dignity..., as opposed to any form of totalitarian government and monopolism, depriving citizens of their democratic basic rights...the aim being to transform Macedonia into a democratic and developed country...this party will resolutely fight for a free and just society of democratic socialism" (from the SDSM Program Declaration).
In forms of elections slogans, it looked something like this: "Macedonia -- a true, independent and democratic factor in the Yugoslav association"; "...we are ready to reorganise Macedonia as a confederate state within the association of Yugoslav peoples..."; "Macedonia, an independent state"; "Equality of citizens before the law"; "Citizens, basic subject of the system"; "Parliamentary democracy -- guarantee of a democratic government and free development of multiparty political life"; "Forming of government bodies to direct the privatisation process in Macedonia"; "Safe perspective for private initiative"; "Krusevo -- an independent economic, tourist and cultural entity"; "Adequate participation of workers in firms' management", and so on.
Such proclaimed "Yugoslavism" is even today the most frequently point used by their political opponents, as an example of their inconsistency in carrying out program-determined goals. Besides, the party was accused of everything else in its program being a veil, and exactly this party (after gaining power) is the best illustration of a last communist bastion in Europe, that its members are communist in disguise, whose eyes are still turned mainly towards north. To all these accusations, SDSM replies with "being a social-democratic party, with reforms as goals, able at the same time to carry out the transformation, and not only putting it down to paper" ( statement by Branko Crvenkovski, at the SDSM Central Committee assembly in December 1993).
On the other hand, it is a fact this party made a much greater impact on the state than expected by its voters. But, that is a result of a political game, played by everyone as it was, leaving SDSM with half of the govt ministers, a prime minister and a president of the country...which secured much greater power for this party than at the beginning, at times after the first multiparty elections in the country. The leadership says this has both good and bad sides -- on one hand, it does mean more power, but, on the other, it includes responsibility for all events in Macedonia. Yet, the party is resolved to keep the power.
Although having both good and bad sides, the power seems to be very hard to let go off, as it is at the same time a challenge and a benefit. One of the arguments with which SDSM explained its vote against confidence in the so-called expert govt, was the govt's incapability of putting an end to the "massive robbery" of state property. The govt is closing eyes before big affairs, classical black market operations, simply creating an impression of the govt itself being involved in them or at least giving legitimacy to such actions, said Georgi Spasov, member of the SDSM Presidency, at the Second Conference, held on June 27, 1992 (only shortly afterwards, in September that year, Branko Crvenkovski, the SDSM President, was elected new Prime Minister of Macedonia). Even nowadays, however, that impression is by no means eliminated. On the contrary. Big affairs, black market manipulations (as admitted by the govt vice-president himself), classical cases of racketeering and suspicious export-import deals continue to be present, along with the same impression of deep govt involvement in such operations.
The SDSM Program Declaration states the "privatisation is given highest priority in the process of creating a new ownership structure. Private ownership is irreplaceable and should essentially be present in all spheres of life." On the other hand, the then current party Secretary and today's vice- president of SDSM, Nikola Popovski, at the same conference, said "the problem of land in Macedonia, its denationalisation or privatisation, also requires much attention. There is a big pressure to bring back the situation before the year of 1945 and to skip over the agriculture reform done in those times. We also must have serious political analyses of what this really means. It is a question of whether we, as a party, will approach this issue quite arbitrarily and how we will behave in Parliament. Can we, as a party with the orientation we have, allow 80% of the population in Macedonia, who now possess land, become landless people? What would that mean on a political and economic plan?"
On a political plan, this party, in a short period of ruling, besides its traditional confrontation with VMRO-DPMNE, surprisingly enough for the political public, entered into another conflict -- this time, with the govt coalition partner, i.e., the Liberal Party. The Liberals mainly accused SDSM of usurping the power, slowing down democratisation processes with the help of the police, control over the media...Soon afterwards, all misunderstandings were overcome and the two parties are nowadays loudly announcing their future electoral coalition partnership. All of this, and especially the govt's success at international level, increased this party's ambition of growing into "sole defenders of national interests" (stated by Branko Crvenkovski, at the December session of the party Central Committee, in 1993). This is exactly what intensified the opposition anger against this party. Inclinations towards compromising, inconsistency, declaring the state's interests as their own, lenience towards political representatives of Albanian minority, lawlessness, neglecting responsibilities at moments when the state sovereignty is endangered, accepting the temporary name for the Republic of Macedonia for use within UN, which was to last only two months, but is still in use...these are main arguments against the previous political activities of SDSM, stated by the opposition. These are also arguments, the political opponents are sure to come out with during the elections campaign, in an attempt to persuade the citizens to vote against SDSM.
On the other hand, SDSM's strong arguments for everything achieved thus far are also not questionable. "Macedonia is already a recognised state...we will, as a state, enter the next elections as a fully and internationally recognised republic. As a member of UN, IMF, the World and European banks, the Central European Initiative, recognised by about 50 states, with foreign embassies in Skopje...These are all merits of this party, partly achieved through its acting as a parliamentary group, partly as a party as a whole, which created such an atmosphere by intervening with the actual govt or the country's president...All most important events in the past 2-3 years, showing Macedonia is undergoing democratisation and reform processes, are linked to this party, to this parliamentary group, and even to certain individuals. When talking about the country's foreign politics, it is generally understood that it is the politics of President Gligorov. When talking about the constitution, it is widely agreed that it is primarily a joint work of Frckovski, Kitanovski and Popovski. The privatisation is identified with Jane Miljovski...On an economic plan, Macedonia has for a first time a macro-economic policy, which is internationally verified and is even supported... (statement by Branko Crvenkovski, at the December session of the Central Committee of SDSM).
It seems quite interesting to point out the fact that, exactly this party, which insisted on survival of Federal Yugoslavia during the first free elections in Macedonia, played such a role in the country's struggle for independence. Explanations of such changes in the party's program state they "do not really present suggestions of essential changes in the Program Declaration, nor in SDSM's basic political views, but are simply adjustments to crucial changes in the Republic of Macedonia, following the disintegration of the former Yugoslavia and the processes of Macedonia becoming an independent state by the Referendum and adopting a new constitution, all the way to its being internationally recognised. In all of these processes, SDSM participated actively, and sometimes even decisively."
The especially sensitive issue of ethnic relations in Macedonia, and the state's official attitude towards the open questions of Macedonian and Albanian ethnicon, is surely just one more problem, bound to be an apple of discord for a long time in the future. The determination to establish a civilian model of society (as opposed to insistence on a national constitution), occasional lenience and inclination towards compromise by the govt when these issues are concerned, are also bound to be a part of the political struggle between parties in Macedonia in the future. Just as it will be a question on which this fall's elections campaigns are again to be built upon. "We are aware that the people wants to be told this is, after all, a state of the Macedonian people, that they (the Albanians) have another state of origin...We know that this brings positive points and that it is the easiest way to the voters, but we are also consciencely choosing the other option" (stated by Branko Crvenkovski, at the said December session).
Past and present credits are here. Even 4 years after, the favourable or unfavourable achievements remain vivid. It only remains to be seen which of those two will prevail during the coming elections.
