As of this writing, the time span already greatly exceeds the crucial month in the life of the European Parliament standing rapporteur for Serbia – Vladimír Bilčík, who has been in that position since October 2019, when he gladly accepted the infamous duty. Full of enthusiasm and knowledge of political science, which he taught at Comenius University in Bratislava, one day, while walking across the Old Bridge, professor Bilčík realized that the works of Samuel Huntington or Carl Schmidt bring the consummate scholar little pleasure, and less comfort, in life. So he decided to test it all in practice. That’s why prof. Bilčík left the cabinet and joined the Democrats, a liberal conservative pro-European party in Slovakia. That’s how he got into the European Parliament, where he received a special assignment as rapporteur for a precarious part of the world, after which he would soon acquire an appropriate nickname – Mr. Serbia.
That nickname is not an easy one to carry, and it is even more difficult to report to the European Parliament about the situation from the country of the same name. Prof. Bilčík had not come across such cases in the literature, although the European reality was quickly convincing him that his theoretical knowledge was one thing, and that life in Europe, especially on its fringes, was something else entirely. Or maybe not only on the fringes, but also in the navel, as Hungarian intellectuals saw their country’s position on the European continent towards the end of the Cold War. Following that logic, Serbia would be like a bladder, one full of kidney stones, like an old ballot box. But prof. Bilčík did well in his role of a rapporteur. Fortunately for him – Serbia has been ruled by one party for over ten years, the system is a pro-European stabilocracy, and there is only one ruler, on every level, to account for – Aleksandar Vučić.
Since they both come from populist parties, the synergy between prof. Bilčík and his candidate Vučić is high. The only difference is that Vučić, when he feels like it, can afford to openly broadcast anti-European slogans (following the example of his mentor and neighbor Orbán), while prof. Bilčík tries to understand Vučić, but has to adapt his reporting speech to European diplomatic practice. This has been confirmed many times already. Something like that happened within a month and a half after the elections in Serbia. From December 17, when the elections were held, to January 17, when they were discussed at the EP session. It continued until the end of January. An analysis of the speech and gestures of prof. Bilčík could help us better understand the relationship between Bilčík and Vučić, but also between the EU and Serbia – a relationship on a path into an unpleasant eternity.
Your job, prof. Bilčík was told in Strasbourg when he took over this position from McAllister, is not to make the political system in Serbia more functional and more European. Your job is to make the European Parliament more European. Do you get that, Bilčík? – they asked him at the end. Of course, replied the future Mr. Serbia and went down in legend. That’s why his reports have always been like that. But those he sent after the December election look like the EEG scans of a man who has lost touch with reality. These statements made by prof. Bilčík during the post-election month look a lot like electroencephalograms with dangerous amplitudes:
***
EEG no 1/17.12.2023.
“We’ve noted that the elections were well conducted, well managed. There are some irregularities when it comes to the reports we received from the field about bringing in additional voters, but not a lot of them. Also, about the potential vote sales, especially in and around polling stations. But again, these were not major incidents, but those that we observed on a smaller scale. So, overall, I think the election went smoothly. That’s why I want to congratulate the citizens of Serbia for voting in greater numbers than last year.”
EEG no 2/19.12.2023.
“I am really concerned about the number of complaints and irregularities reported in the parliamentary and local elections in Serbia on December 17… In order to assess these elections in detail, we need the final report of the OSCE mission. International observers have reported numerous irregularities. These include misuse of public resources, insufficient separation of official functions and campaign activities, intimidation and pressure on voters, cases of vote sale. Also, the Regulatory Body for Electronic Media (REM) was passive throughout the campaign and its representatives did not communicate with international observers.”
EEG no. 3/11.01.2024.
“Serbia is a representative democracy that organized its own elections. This was done by the authorities and political parties from the entire spectrum. The ruling majority and the opposition participated in the elections. It is important to listen to the observers engaged in the long-term observation mission of the OSCE and take their conclusions seriously. I am sure that international institutions can work together with domestic ones in Serbia.”
EEG no. 4/17.01.2024.
“As observers, we saw that the key processes for voting and counting were followed, but there was not enough secrecy. We received reports of voters being brought to Belgrade in order to increase the electorate. And that’s why we ask the competent authorities to investigate it and give us feedback on all issues we mentioned. All EP observers stated as much on December 18. Colleagues, I stand behind that report and I stand by Serbia now. Because I believe that Serbia deserves better, it deserves a climate that does not have constant political campaigns like now. People in Serbia deserve a clear choice between Serbia and Europe and ability to make those decisions.”
EEG no. 5/29.01.2024.
“We were in charge of observing the parliamentary elections and there were many objections and challenges with the voting process. However, I think it all has to be handled through proper channels. The courts and other institutions must deal with these issues… So, the results of the parliamentary elections have been announced and I think it’s time for new institutions to start working. Serbian parliamentarians should take over their mandates, and the government should be formed. The country needs to resolve all issues through appropriate institutional channels… But it always takes two to tango. Serbia’s problems cannot be solved within the institutions of the European Union, within the European Parliament.”
EEG no. 6/29.01.2024.
“If anyone interfered in the election process, it was Moscow, it was Russia. It’s a game we’ve seen so many times from Vladimir Putin and his allies. This should be another reason for Serbia. To work on its European future and on its sovereign and independent approach to the European future.”
***
When these six findings are arranged and compared, the conclusion that prof. Bilčík has not quite been himself in the last month and a half seems obvious. However, his state of mind is not the mandate of this article. Just like, according to ODIHR head Albert Johnson, it was not the mandate of ODIHR to assess whether the elections in Serbia were fair and free, but only to record possible irregularities on the day of voting. That report is still pending.
Representatives of the European People’s Party were opposed to the European Parliament vote on the resolution on elections in Serbia at the beginning of February. Their representative – Mr. Serbia, meanwhile, led the domestic and European public through the labyrinth of post-election impasse. It was smooth, but not sweet. Serious irregularities were noted, the REM did not function, but finally the results of the parliamentary elections were announced and now everyone should accept them and start their new jobs. If there were some irregularities, then the courts in Serbia should deal with it. Admittedly, Serbia does not have institutions any more, but nevertheless, he believes that Mr. Vučić will fulfill his promises regarding judicial reform and media freedom. After all, long ago prof. Bilčík read that it should be like that in theory.
The line between theory and practice is very blurry in the Balkans. The only thing that is clear are bare political interests. And when you run out of good excuses, it’s easiest to mention Russia, which prof. Bilčík did, ignoring the fact that it was he who brutally interfered in the elections first, setting their legitimacy and legality, with occasional meanderings, depending on reports of the OSCE and the civil sector. Even the opposition itself was unable to deconstruct Vučić’s electoral engineering. But Crta did, which is why they suffered the biggest backlash from the authorities. Their report should be translated into all EU languages, first of all into Slovak, so that Mr. Serbia can be convinced that the last elections in Serbia followed the “Hungarian scenario.”
He will say that he is not interested in the Belgrade elections, because they are not in his job description. For him, the 2023 elections in Serbia are already in the distant past, since he is now busy widely announcing the Growth Plan of six billion euros that the EU has for the Western Balkan region. Mr. Serbia primarily has Serbia’s interests in mind. It could “profit significantly,” if it only implemented reforms and established institutions. Everything is going great – the “fresh mandates from the last elections are on the table,” Vučić has Dr. Nestorović up his sleeve, Republika Srpska is already on the bus – so let’s get down to business!
Translated by Marijana Simić
Peščanik.net, 07.02.2024.
- Biografija
- Latest Posts
Latest posts by Saša Ilić (see all)
- Nećemo valjda o tome - 20/04/2024
- Za Beograd se mora boriti - 10/04/2024
- Stadionska groznica - 29/03/2024
